1. 54

  2. 26

    The thing I don’t see people say enough (or at all) when discussing this Juicero fail:

    Routinely drinking fruit juices is not, in fact, healthy!

    Doesn’t matter if squeezed or pasteurized, there’s just too much sugar! And no amount of vitamins is going to offset the damage.

    1. 15

      My favorite juicer not only provides the freshest, most nutritious product, but is also the cheapest and requires less cleaning than the Juicero. The one drawback is that it requires owning at least a partial set, but at least each part is individually small and unobtrusive. I won’t tell you how to obtain it, but more than likely you’re already carrying a set in your mouth.

      1. 8

        I own a set of these, too, and, though the cleaning regimen is straightforward, the maintenance costs are large enough that there’s an entire arbitrage industry around it. And, yes, the initial product offering is free (and the first part refresh, though that happens pretty quickly given the total equipment lifetime), but replacing parts eventually becomes quite expensive, and requires significant downtime.

        Don’t get me wrong – the convenience factor is very high with this product. I’m just saying that we shouldn’t downplay the (potentially significant) costs.

      2. 7

        This is a tad incorrect. Whole fruit with pulp and all is actually quite healthy. I cannot quite get the link but there was a research done with test groups consuming water, sugared water, freshly squeezed fruit juice and sliced raw fruit. Most healthy outcome was water (lol) and sliced raw fruit.

        1. 16

          Juices are considered unhealthy in comparison to the actual fruit simply because of the sheer amount of it: a glass of orange juice contains juice from about 4 oranges which translates to about a full daily doze of sugar. And you’re not going to chew through 4 oranges each time you’re feeling thirsty :-)

          1. 4

            you’re not going to chew through 4 oranges each time you’re feeling thirsty

            Been there, done that. ?

          2. 4

            What @isagalaev said, and adding to it, the “health benefit” is that fibers slow down the absorption of carbohydrates.

            1. 1

              I thought I’d read that the act of mastication and digestion of intact whole fruit was something that required more energy and delivered a greater health benefit than merely the whole fruits’ ingredients.

          3. 19

            If you’re not even squeezing real fruit, then what is the point of this “juicer”? Why would I buy Juciero packs, which require a $400 can-opener, when I can just get a 12-pack of Naked fruit juice?

            1. 27

              The naked juice doesn’t have a QR code on it to prevent you from drinking it a day after expiration.

              1. 5

                It just has an expiration date. Much simpler.

                1. 5

                  There is unfortunately a well-known exploit in that expiry mechanism, which can lead to careless drink-after-expiry vulnerabilities!

                  1. 2

                    Yeah, ownership of objects like this can lead to problems if mismanaged.

              2. 8

                I think there is real fruit in the bags just packed conveniently

                1. 5

                  The bags last for 5-7 days after which the machine supposedly refuses to process them.

                  What advantage does this machine deliver which bottled, cold-pressed juice does not?

                  1. 4

                    My god that sounds like the dumbest shit ever. DRM in kitchen appliances.

                    1. 3

                      “Taking the D out of DRM”

                      1. 2

                        See also coffee pods and printer ink cartridges.

                      2. 2

                        There’s an alternative on kickstarter which at least allows you to fill your own bags of fruit.

                        1. 2

                          I don’t like the tagline for this product. It says “Juicing without the cleaning”, but:

                          Chop fruit and vegetables into pieces roughly the size of a dollar coin for maximum yield

                          … which means you have to clean the knife and cutting board. And if you don’t want to use the single-use bags, you have to clean the bag between each use, AND put in a new “cotton filter”, which is USD $0.20.

                          What they mean is you don’t have to clean the machine. A bit misleading…

                        2. 1

                          I’m not sure without actually trying it.

                    2. 18

                      There’s a bit in “Surely You’re Joking Mr. Feynman” in which, IIRC, he compares the particle physics labs at MIT and Princeton (?). At MIT they had nice, clean facilities and plenty of money. At Princeton they had a leaky basement and equipment put together with, metaphorically, duct tape and prayers. Yet, according to the book, Princeton was doing more and better work.

                      1. 19

                        Well, I think the Princeton one caught on fire eventually… so there is something to be said for basic levels of quality

                        1. 4

                          I have an alternative theory. Cause and effect have been swapped here. I don’t think they chose to over-engineer and that resulted in a higher price point. I think they picked a higher price-point, they wanted a 1k “lifestyle” kitchen appliance that you could show off to your friends and they built a rube-goldberg machine to effectively accomplish that task.

                          The core differentiating feature of many products is their high price point, and the rest is just a mutually agreed upon story to make sure that there is visual evidence of the high price point (and transitively, the owner’s wealth).

                          1. 4

                            I can’t look at this teardown without hearing AvE in my head.

                            1. 3

                              I’ve just sent him the link. Let’s hope he decides to do a review of this magnificent example of overengineering.

                              1. 4

                                Don’t forget to put your ____ in a _____!

                                1. 2

                                  Skookum as frig!

                                  1. 1

                                    Milled aluminum choochers!

                                    1. 1

                                      Same here! I can’t help but feel AvE would do a much better teardown, not only looking at what’s there right now, but considering what’s blatantly missing from this article; what can be improved in the future! If those are machined gears then there’s no reason they can’t cut cost by sintering. The article says it’s so expensive to apply “thousands of pounds of pressure” completely ignoring that any home-gamer clamp can do the same.

                                      It’s still an over engineered and expensive clamp, but I feel like the article is dishonest about where it is and where it can go.

                                      1. 3

                                        A lot of these “unnecessarily machined” parts look to me like they were designed for casting but the tooling wasn’t ready for the scheduled first run (typical). They would be a lot cheaper in mass production.

                                        The gears are OEM, they are not that expensive when you buy them by the thousand. You’d need to sell a lot of juicers to break even on sintering tooling for them (and machined gears are stronger), doesn’t make sense for a commodity part.

                                        Overall I refuse to believe that the engineers who had enough skill and experience to design this and get it working are so blissfully unaware of production process costs. Simply doesn’t happen IRL.

                                    2. 1

                                      All they ever needed was to ask their grandma or go to amazon for high end device.

                                      1. 2

                                        Yeah, dunno why they decided they need to press the entire surface of the bag at once instead of just running a roller from top to bottom.

                                        I mean, it would still be silly, but maybe it would be $200 of silly instead of $400 - $700.