Santa brought me a Nescafe Dolce Gusto

Forums New posts
Jack

Jack

Private Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
After years of dropping hints to my wife Santa brought me a coffee machine, a Nescafe Dolce Gusto.

OK I know how to make stuff with it and have even done a wee bit experimenting!

My 'I don't know' bit is.

Are all the milk pods the same stuff?

I've got Chococino milk, Cappuccino milk and Latte Macchiato milk. For anyone unware to make a cup of these drinks you use two pods, the flavour pod and the milk pod.

To be honest it's for when I buy my next batch of pods. I've noticed you can get these flavoured pods on their own and with a big carton of milk in the fridge I'm wondering what's the point of buying milk pods.






By the way Santa, if your looking in. I was wanting a proper expresso machine. Maybe next year eh ;-)
 
Ones with the milk pods are a rip off. Get a box of espresso pods add it to a cup of hot milk and viola you've got 16 lattes for price of 8. Comes out that fast you still get a froth on it. Not that I drink lattes of course being male.

Can't remember the name but the green and blue espresso pods are both tasty.
 
Jack said:
After years of dropping hints to my wife Santa brought me a coffee machine, a Nescafe Dolce Gusto.

OK I know how to make stuff with it and have even done a wee bit experimenting!

My 'I don't know' bit is.

Are all the milk pods the same stuff?

I've got Chococino milk, Cappuccino milk and Latte Macchiato milk. For anyone unware to make a cup of these drinks you use two pods, the flavour pod and the milk pod.

To be honest it's for when I buy my next batch of pods. I've noticed you can get these flavoured pods on their own and with a big carton of milk in the fridge I'm wondering what's the point of buying milk pods.






By the way Santa, if your looking in. I was wanting a proper expresso machine. Maybe next year eh ;-)
Click to expand...

I was given one if those a year or two back. I sold it on eBay without openg, favouring the moka pot and cafitiere. I've tried it at other folks houses and the coffee is actually pretty decent, I just don't like the idea.
 
Ive got one.
Makes pretty good espresso and other manly coffees. My youngest quite likes the cappuccino it turns out, but that's youngsters for you. Almost asexual.
 
I was given a Tassimo machine a couple of years ago and it's similar to the Dolce Gusto with its wee "pods" etc but, once the novelty wore off I soon returned to my old filter machine. A regular visit to McBean's in Aberdeen keeps me supplied with great coffee and I make a full pot at a time rather than faffing around with these pods and gimmicky drinks.
 
Is banned said:
Nescafe is fookin rank!
Click to expand...

Absolutely. The best coffee (apart from Greggs latte) to make in a filter at home that I have found is Lidl's Melangerie label. 100% arabica, the pack - which is black and red in colour, holds 2 inner 'brick packs' of coffee.
 
Is banned said:
Nescafe is fookin rank!
Click to expand...

Beagle said:
Absolutely. The best coffee (apart from Greggs latte) to make in a filter at home that I have found is Lidl's Melangerie label. 100% arabica, the pack - which is black and red in colour, holds 2 inner 'brick packs' of coffee.
Click to expand...

Of all the instant coffees I think you're wrong! I've discussed this often over the years and the general outcome is that it's what you're brought up on :-)

We have filter coffee fae Aldi, cheapo Italian blend, in the morning and I enjoy that.

The machine is a sort of wee treat looking after myself in retirement :-) and gives the option of lots of different drinks with little hassle. Although to be fair I'm never going to try making tea with it, that would be gross ;-)
 
I'm with [MENTION=8057]Is banned[/MENTION] - though not sure he picked up that this isn't really Nescafé we're talking about, in the traditional instant coffee sense.

I think all instant is minging - it's like a different drink really. That said I have common tastes and far prefer filter coffee to espresso machine type outputs. My hunner squid espresso machine is basically and ornament since I got a cheapo filter machine. Not keen on these capsule ones though only ever had them in offices which probably has created some negative association in my head!
 
Dunno how many of these coffee machines I've been given over the years, but not one has been any good imo. The coffee is never hot enough for me?

Nothing can beat the filter coffee machine for me, even the really fancy coffee machines you see top knot sporting, check shirt wearing barista bawbags polishing.

Out of laziness I do have instant coffee, Douwe Egberts #4 which I think is fine, but not as good a filter.
 
As others here have implied, the filter is the way to go.

When I came over to Holland as 'lad (sortae) over 30 year ago, it was coffeeland. And all filter, in filter machines, usually made by Philips (surprise surprise).

Coffee at breakfast, coffee at lunch, coffee at work several times a day (though usually from a vending machine it has to be said) - and meanwhile of tea hardly a sign!

Over the piece, tea has become more popular - although still sans milk of course - and the Dutch tend not to just drink coffee at the drop of a hat anymore.

But nowadays, a good cup or two in the morning of filter coffee of indeterminate origin, cheapo supermarket's own brand, really hits the spot. Black and no sugar, all the taste you need enclosed herewith.

When I have a cup of coffee on visits back to Scotland it's usually instant and always boke-inducing.

On the downside, I have seen more and more of these coffee pad thingies here lately, but the taste is still not a patch on the filter stuff.

If I had the dosh, I would go to a shop in Amsterdam and buy some of the good stuff fresh - Moroccan or Brazilian or Colombian, I can't remember the good ones anymore!

PS Dolce Gusto = sweet taste. I think they mean that more calorifically than figuratively.
 
Am a Starbucks man sadly. Hate myself for it, I really do, but love their coffee. They do a Colombian filter, does the trick for me
And Eegie, I truly do believe that ALL Nescafe is fookin rank, just to clarify lol
And Southfield is on the money for me. If ye have to do instant, Douwe Egberts is the way forward, although I prefer #5 which is generally harder to find for some reason!
 
Is banned said:
Am a Starbucks man sadly. Hate myself for it, I really do, but love their coffee. They do a Colombian filter, does the trick for me
And Eegie, I truly do believe that ALL Nescafe is fookin rank, just to clarify lol
And Southfield is on the money for me. If ye have to do instant, Douwe Egberts is the way forward, although I prefer #5 which is generally harder to find for some reason!
Click to expand...

Fuxsake Daveman :tuttut: Them Starbucks dinnae pay their tax....and their flat white is smaller than Costas. :tuttut:

Costas cofee pisses on starbucks....go on man...
 
Is banned said:
Am a Starbucks man sadly. Hate myself for it, I really do, but love their coffee. They do a Colombian filter, does the trick for me
And Eegie, I truly do believe that ALL Nescafe is fookin rank, just to clarify lol
And Southfield is on the money for me. If ye have to do instant, Douwe Egberts is the way forward, although I prefer #5 which is generally harder to find for some reason!
Click to expand...


FFS dave Starbucks
 
You'd be a hypocrite if you avoided one company because of dodgy tax dealings but not the hundreds of others that you interact with weekly.

You're well within your right to avoid Starbucks on behalf of their coffee tasting like piss water tho, absolutely gantin. Every one of Costa's coffees are superior to the Starbucks equivalent.
 
The__Proclaimer said:
You'd be a hypocrite if you avoided one company because of dodgy tax dealings but not the hundreds of others that you interact with weekly.

You're well within your right to avoid Starbucks on behalf of their coffee tasting like piss water tho, absolutely gantin. Every one of Costa's coffees are superior to the Starbucks equivalent.
Click to expand...
Quite correct Proccie. I also wonder how many of our peers that foment about tax avoidance are partial to a streamed video or hooky kindle book, therebye evading (not just avoiding) both tax and payment to the creator (as well as less sympathetic middlemen)?

I'm not trolling you - as I responded with similar to one of your recent posts with similar, I should point that outs - because you are not being hypocritical about it.

But for others mounted on high horse, I hope your noses are clean :coffee:
 
egb_hibs said:
Quite correct Proccie. I also wonder how many of our peers that foment about tax avoidance are partial to a streamed video or hooky kindle book, therebye evading (not just avoiding) both tax and payment to the creator (as well as less sympathetic middlemen)?

I'm not trolling you - as I responded with similar to one of your recent posts with similar, I should point that outs - because you are not being hypocritical about it.

But for others mounted on high horse, I hope your noses are clean :coffee:
Click to expand...

I'm not one for boycotting industries because of tax avoidance schemes. For one thing, as Proccie pointed out, there is no real way of knowing who is avoiding what and more importantly [for me] if I am out and about and I fancy a cup of coffee I am not going to go out of my way to try to find a coffee shop that, I think, pays all it's taxes. The same applies to anything I want to buy.

PS. I see NEXT has had a bad christmas period and wonder whether it is coincidence or whether facebook had a part to play in that when someone highlighted that the owner pays no tax [or something like that].
 
I hark back to 9/11 when the rescue services were needing water for people choking on the dust from the collapse of the twin towers. They went to the nearby Starbucks who insisted the water was to be paid for before they'd give the rescue services any. Never set foot in a Starbucks in my life as a result.
 
Am feeling the heat here like promise to stop using S*******s as soon as I use up ma Xmas gift vouchers! lol
But I certainly will not be going to friggin Costa's!!!! God damn awful coffee ya bunch of bams!!!!
 
emerald green said:
Fuxsake Daveman :tuttut: Them Starbucks dinnae pay their tax....and their flat white is smaller than Costas. :tuttut:

Costas cofee pisses on starbucks....go on man...
Click to expand...

I have spent the last month working for Costa, their coffee beans are up to four times stronger than competitors and as others say, their coffee is far batter. They pay their taxes too.

On another note, the best instant coffee is Indonesian kopi kapal api, I bring a case full back every visit and is as good as any Americano anyone has ever over charged me for.
 
So nobody knows if all the feckin milk pods have the same stuff in then?


Personally I don't think it's hypocritical to avoid non tax paying companies while whinging about them although being aware when making choices can't be a bad thing. Knowing my luck if I made a decision to use a supposed tax paying company one day for a big item the next it would be in the press that it didn't, or worse it was a cheating lying company like VW!

I suspect, as indicated by the huge profits these companies make, most people don't give a shit!

I'm a bit of a stubborn bugger though and still don't drink Tennents lager. That's been from the time they started to sponsor the old firm. I'm surprised they're still in business. laff out loud!!!

Of course that/this is a protest of another kind.
 
Jack said:
So nobody knows if all the feckin milk pods have the same stuff in then?


Personally I don't think it's hypocritical to avoid non tax paying companies while whinging about them although being aware when making choices can't be a bad thing. Knowing my luck if I made a decision to use a supposed tax paying company one day for a big item the next it would be in the press that it didn't, or worse it was a cheating lying company like VW!

I suspect, as indicated by the huge profits these companies make, most people don't give a shit!

I'm a bit of a stubborn bugger though and still don't drink Tennents lager. That's been from the time they started to sponsor the old firm. I'm surprised they're still in business. laff out loud!!!

Of course that/this is a protest of another kind.
Click to expand...

I don't drink Tennents because it's fuckin pish. Same as any other UK brewed beers or brewed under licence. They're all the same pisswater with a different label. Only beer I ever drink these days is anything that's brewed outwith the UK
 
Jack said:
So nobody knows if all the feckin milk pods have the same stuff in then?


Personally I don't think it's hypocritical to avoid non tax paying companies while whinging about them although being aware when making choices can't be a bad thing. Knowing my luck if I made a decision to use a supposed tax paying company one day for a big item the next it would be in the press that it didn't, or worse it was a cheating lying company like VW!

I suspect, as indicated by the huge profits these companies make, most people don't give a $#@!!

I'm a bit of a stubborn bugger though and still don't drink Tennents lager. That's been from the time they started to sponsor the old firm. I'm surprised they're still in business. laff out loud!!!

Of course that/this is a protest of another kind.
Click to expand...

The Tassimo "milk pods" are all marked differently, i.e "for capuccino", "for creme brulee" etc but I suspect they're all just the same creamer.
I don't drink Tenents lager either, but only because it's pish.
 
Beagle said:
I hark back to 9/11 when the rescue services were needing water for people choking on the dust from the collapse of the twin towers. They went to the nearby Starbucks who insisted the water was to be paid for before they'd give the rescue services any. Never set foot in a Starbucks in my life as a result.
Click to expand...

I've never heard that before. It's a shocker.

A quick google found this;

On 11 September 2001, employees of the Midwood Ambulance Service were on hand at what has come to be known as "Ground Zero," the rubble that once was the World Trade Center. They approached a Starbucks near the disaster site because they needed water to treat the victims of the terrorist attack. Starbucks was willing to help ... for a price. It sold the rescue workers three cases for $130 cash on the barrelhead, with the money needed to complete the transaction coming out of the workers' pockets.

Later, suspecting the workers had been overcharged, ambulance company officials called Starbucks and sent e-mail to the
company but said their queries were ignored. One described his call to Starbucks thus: "When I called ... to inquire about this at your 'contact us' phone number from your Web site, I was told in a rather rude way that this could not have happened and abruptly thanked for my call and dismissed."

Only after the text quoted above became circulated on the Internet did Starbucks address this matter. The company eventually delivered a $130 check (via messenger) to the ambulance company, and its president, Orin Smith, called them to apologize personally.

Apology and check notwithstanding, lingering and disquieting doubts remain. True, an employee of any firm can act in an unthinking manner that will bring embarrassment upon his employer (and in this case one can't necessarily fault the low-level Starbucks worker who was unsure about handing over his employer's merchandise for free without authorization), but that is not the real shame here; it's the non-action of Starbucks management in the face of such an incident.

Perhaps a Starbucks employee was fault for messing up, but even if so, his error was the act of a lone individual. All it would have taken to set things right at that point would have been for someone a bit higher up in the company to pony up a prompt apology and reimbursement of the money paid for the water. The measure of a business is often found not in what it does right, but in how well and how quickly it handles matters when things have gone wrong.

Unfortunately, Starbucks' customer relations and management committed the real offense in that no one at any of these higher levels did anything to address the wrong until the incident became public. When the ambulance workers called the company to inquire about the possibility of having been overcharged, they were told what they had described couldn't have happened, so thank you and good-bye. Their letter to the president of Starbucks detailing the event went unanswered. Calls from a Seattle journalist to Howard Schultz (Starbucks chairman and chief global strategist) and Orin Smith (president and CEO) weren't returned. (Only after that journalist's piece about the $130 water ran on 25 September 2001 did Smith meet with the newsman.)

At each point where a correction could have been made, the ambulance workers were brushed off. It took the attraction of cyberspace and media attention to prompt an offer of redress that should have been made the moment Starbucks was made aware of the incident. The ambulance workers did eventually get their $130 back, but they had to jump through hoops for what should have been freely and promptly tendered.

Starbucks isn't heartless — they did provide free coffee to rescue workers, gave $1 million to the September 11th Fund (a national relief endeavor to help victims of the tragedy), and collects further contributions for the fund from its customers and friends. (Other companies have made similar contributions, including $10 million each from Microsoft and Lilly Endowment, $5 million from IBM, and $4 million from UPS.) It's thus not an unfeeling company, merely one that fell down badly on problem resolution.

Yet the question still begs to be asked: Had the story about the ambulance workers not gotten out and had it not given Starbucks a black eye, is there reason to suppose that a check would have been written or an apology made?
 
Beagle said:
I don't drink Tennents because it's fuckin pish. Same as any other UK brewed beers or brewed under licence. They're all the same pisswater with a different label. Only beer I ever drink these days is anything that's brewed outwith the UK
Click to expand...

I know it's a personal preference, but I think there's a degree of snobbery involved with folk and the big T. As a supping lager when out on the scoop I think it's perfectly acceptable.And West brewery also from Glasgow produce lovely beers imo.
 
southfieldhibby said:
I know it's a personal preference, but I think there's a degree of snobbery involved with folk and the big T. As a supping lager when out on the scoop I think it's perfectly acceptable.And West brewery also from Glasgow produce lovely beers imo.
Click to expand...

Nah. Tennents is awful. My personal favourites are German bier but there used to be some good import US and Canadian ones a few years ago until Carling and the like start brewing under licence at which point they lost their unique flavour and all tasted the same.
I dare say the independent brewers are a decent slurp and one I tasted recently while on a rare visit to the capital was St.Mungo - a German style lager brewed in the weege. Serve it on tap in The Abbotsford on Rose Street
 
Beagle said:
Nah. Tennents is awful. My personal favourites are German bier but there used to be some good import US and Canadian ones a few years ago until Carling and the like start brewing under licence at which point they lost their unique flavour and all tasted the same.
I dare say the independent brewers are a decent slurp and one I tasted recently while on a rare visit to the capital was St.Mungo - a German style lager brewed in the weege. Serve it on tap in The Abbotsford on Rose Street
Click to expand...

Fair doos my man.

The St.Mungo beer is brewed by West: Westbeer
 
Sorry [MENTION=4263]Dub[/MENTION] the Starbucks 9/11 story reads to me like one of these things where internet folk get all horrified without any reference to reality.

For instance, does anyone for one second believe Starbucks execs would have been against free distribution of water for 101 reasons, from ordinary decency to more self interested concerns such as brand image?

The real reason is almost certainly - and their fault in itself - a corporate culture which ensures 'computer says no' type thinking from staff granted insufficient autonomy to apply common sense to local situations. I detest that sort of thing but it's hardly unique to Starbucks and hardly unique to business (if anything is worse in public sector).

Ditto the problems in seeking redress afterwards - I suspect it's probably the case that the first time someone with decision making authority heard about, probably was from the press. Again the kind of 'you are in a queue, we very much value your call' type comms midden that results in this is sort of thing is Starbucks own fault - along with every big private and public organisation of the day - but it's not really anything to do with some evil Scrooges milking disaster victims for money and grudgingly returning a few dollars only when the noble tribunes of the press exposed them.

In short, yes its dismal - but dismal in a pedestrian way, smacking of the general pishness of the way things are organised these days. But a 'shocker', or example of scheming malevolence? I don't see it myself.

- - - Updated - - -

1875 said:
I have spent the last month working for Costa, their coffee beans are up to four times stronger than competitors and as others say, their coffee is far batter. They pay their taxes too.

On another note, the best instant coffee is Indonesian kopi kapal api, I bring a case full back every visit and is as good as any Americano anyone has ever over charged me for.
Click to expand...
That's why I'd pick Starbucks over them. Starbucks is so weak you can drink pints of the stuff, which stuck in an office is a good thing. The equivalent volume of Costa has me bouncing off the walls!
 
egb_hibs said:
Sorry [MENTION=4263]Dub[/MENTION] the Starbucks 9/11 story reads to me like one of these things where internet folk get all horrified without any reference to reality.

For instance, does anyone for one second believe Starbucks execs would have been against free distribution of water for 101 reasons, from ordinary decency to more self interested concerns such as brand image?

The real reason is almost certainly - and their fault in itself - a corporate culture which ensures 'computer says no' type thinking from staff granted insufficient autonomy to apply common sense to local situations. I detest that sort of thing but it's hardly unique to Starbucks and hardly unique to business (if anything is worse in public sector).

Ditto the problems in seeking redress afterwards - I suspect it's probably the case that the first time someone with decision making authority heard about, probably was from the press. Again the kind of 'you are in a queue, we very much value your call' type comms midden that results in this is sort of thing is Starbucks own fault - along with every big private and public organisation of the day - but it's not really anything to do with some evil Scrooges milking disaster victims for money and grudgingly returning a few dollars only when the noble tribunes of the press exposed them.

In short, yes its dismal - but dismal in a pedestrian way, smacking of the general pishness of the way things are organised these days. But a 'shocker', or example of scheming malevolence? I don't see it myself.

- - - Updated - - -


That's why I'd pick Starbucks over them. Starbucks is so weak you can drink pints of the stuff, which stuck in an office is a good thing. The equivalent volume of Costa has me bouncing off the walls!
Click to expand...

I should have made it clear that I edited by adding in the actual report which, I agree, turns out not to be an actual shocker on the part of Starbucks and probably more to do with someone in the coffee shop not having the sense to override their programming and hand out free water.
 
Dub said:
I should have made it clear that I edited by adding in the actual report which, I agree, turns out not to be an actual shocker on the part of Starbucks and probably more to do with someone in the coffee shop not having the sense to override their programming and hand out free water.
Click to expand...

Thanks for confirming that Dub. As soon as I posted the original story I should have hot footed it to the bookies to get a bet on who would dive in first to rubbish the story:rollfloor
 
southfieldhibby said:
I know it's a personal preference, but I think there's a degree of snobbery involved with folk and the big T. As a supping lager when out on the scoop I think it's perfectly acceptable.And West brewery also from Glasgow produce lovely beers imo.
Click to expand...
100% agree. In a blind test served at the same temperature out of the same glass nobody could correctly identify which lager was which. The best lager is the coldest draught one in the pub. All of them are temperamental to loads of factors that's why I prefer a Guinness, most consistent draught pint out there.
 
Beagle said:
Thanks for confirming that Dub. As soon as I posted the original story I should have hot footed it to the bookies to get a bet on who would dive in first to rubbish the story:rollfloor
Click to expand...

I' guessing your money wouldn't have been on me but another poster who has responded :hmmm
 
southfieldhibby said:
I know it's a personal preference, but I think there's a degree of snobbery involved with folk and the big T. As a supping lager when out on the scoop I think it's perfectly acceptable.And West brewery also from Glasgow produce lovely beers imo.
Click to expand...

Agree M. Also reasonably affordable. As a cooking lager I like it when I come home. Much better than the equivalents south of the border in my humble opinion.

I have a Nescafe Dolce Gusto machine - a one-cup job for the sad singleton that I currently am. Absolutely love it and have mothballed my filter machine on the strength of it. Do take the point that it could be a tad hotter but I find that with some filters too.

I take the Lungo and Americano pods myself. I had a few of those creamer pods and added instant coffee to them being the ultimate philistine that I am.
 
The__Proclaimer said:
100% agree. In a blind test served at the same temperature out of the same glass nobody could correctly identify which lager was which. The best lager is the coldest draught one in the pub. All of them are temperamental to loads of factors that's why I prefer a Guinness, most consistent draught pint out there.
Click to expand...

Of course nobody could tell the difference because it's all the same piss just put into different containers when it comes to UK brewed stuff, that's what I've been saying. And I agree, Guinness is my preferred pint when there's no continental choices.

- - - Updated - - -

Dub said:
I' guessing your money wouldn't have been on me but another poster who has responded :hmmm
Click to expand...

Yup. Guess who
 
Beagle said:
Thanks for confirming that Dub. As soon as I posted the original story I should have hot footed it to the bookies to get a bet on who would dive in first to rubbish the story:rollfloor
Click to expand...
:worthy

- - - Updated - - -

Another vote for the big T...on draft it's lovely, though out a can it's shit. The other thing is, as more inexperienced men crumble over the pace as their needlessly strong Peronis etc slowly but surely unman them, the T drinking man of the world looks on sagely; dignity intact, poise maintained. :yeah:
 
I don't do tinned lager of any kind. Instant indigestion.
However, any draught lager in a frozen glass seems to hit the spot.
I love Peroni, and as my capacity for pints is that of a girl or perhaps a small goat, the strength problem is immaterial

Currently quaffing Tropical on draught before doing justice to the Rioja.
Life's a bitch.
 
Sir Shrink said:
I don't do tinned lager of any kind. Instant indigestion.
However, any draught lager in a frozen glass seems to hit the spot.
I love Peroni, and as my capacity for pints is that of a girl or perhaps a small goat, the strength problem is immaterial

Currently quaffing Tropical on draught before doing justice to the Rioja.
Life's a $#@!.
Click to expand...

All week I have avoided responding to your Gran Can posts, but I've reached the tipping point:

B@st@rd.:coffee:
 
You know how warm lager at a bbq is the worst tasting liquid ever? Anyone tried putting ice in it? No one tried it with cider til a Magners ad campaign, always wondered why a lager brand hasn't suggested the same considering the colder it is the better it is.

As I get lazy in the sun I've never experimented this idea, have any of you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
  • Menu
  • Home
  • Hibs Chat
  • New Posts
  • Just Back
  • Chatroom