My Taylor digital scale

In article , Ignoramus10003
wrote:

It has an interesting "feature". Let's say I step on it. It displays a
certain weight, let's say 176.2. I step back from it, step on it
again, and voila, the weight is always exactly the same. 176.2. Great
you say? Very consistent? Not really. I step back, take a 1 lb weight,
step on the scale with that weight, but the scale displays the same
old 176.2! Now if I take a 5 lb weight and step on it, it would
display a new weight. I take 5lb new weight off, step on the scale
again without a weight, and NOW it displays a new weight say 176.8.

What does this mean? It means that the scale (digital) is programmed
to display not its actual reading, but the previous reading if the
weight did not change much in comparison. It is programmed to hide its
inconsistency so that the consumers think it is extremely accurate,

Perhaps you should take up ballet or step dancing or use a tape measure
or half filled bathtub instead.
which it is not.

I would rather have an inconsistent scale than the scale that is
essentially lying. But I know how to defeat it and I got used to it. I
am a computer programmer, that's why I became interested in this
problem.

i
223/176/180

Yikes. You mean....maybe my scale is deceiving me? The nasty thing. And it
looks so innocent just laying there on the floor.

Cat

"Ignoramus10003" wrote in message
...
It has an interesting "feature". Let's say I step on it. It displays a
certain weight, let's say 176.2. I step back from it, step on it
again, and voila, the weight is always exactly the same. 176.2. Great
you say? Very consistent? Not really. I step back, take a 1 lb weight,
step on the scale with that weight, but the scale displays the same
old 176.2! Now if I take a 5 lb weight and step on it, it would
display a new weight. I take 5lb new weight off, step on the scale
again without a weight, and NOW it displays a new weight say 176.8.

What does this mean? It means that the scale (digital) is programmed
to display not its actual reading, but the previous reading if the
weight did not change much in comparison. It is programmed to hide its
inconsistency so that the consumers think it is extremely accurate,
which it is not.

I would rather have an inconsistent scale than the scale that is
essentially lying. But I know how to defeat it and I got used to it. I
am a computer programmer, that's why I became interested in this
problem.

i
223/176/180

I have a digital scale made by "Thinner". It passed the weight test. I first
weighed myself. Then I held a can that was 1.5 lbs. and weighed again. The
scale faithfully registered the added weight. Then I went back and weighed
again without the can. Scale weighed accurately.

My scale is vindicated. : It should be...it cost enough!

Cat

"Ignoramus10003" wrote in message
...
It has an interesting "feature". Let's say I step on it. It displays a
certain weight, let's say 176.2. I step back from it, step on it
again, and voila, the weight is always exactly the same. 176.2. Great
you say? Very consistent? Not really. I step back, take a 1 lb weight,
step on the scale with that weight, but the scale displays the same
old 176.2! Now if I take a 5 lb weight and step on it, it would
display a new weight. I take 5lb new weight off, step on the scale
again without a weight, and NOW it displays a new weight say 176.8.

What does this mean? It means that the scale (digital) is programmed
to display not its actual reading, but the previous reading if the
weight did not change much in comparison. It is programmed to hide its
inconsistency so that the consumers think it is extremely accurate,
which it is not.

I would rather have an inconsistent scale than the scale that is
essentially lying. But I know how to defeat it and I got used to it. I
am a computer programmer, that's why I became interested in this
problem.

i
223/176/180

Maybe there's nothing wrong with displaying the same weight if it's within
a certain range and time frame. After all, how many times are you going
to lose a pound or two in the few seconds between the weigh-ins? Don't
sweat the small stuffG I can step on my Tanita several times and
normally get the same reading but often I get a half pound difference -
I'll take the lower weightg

Beverly

Seems to me it was somewhere in the neighborhood of $65 bucks (in LA, so
probably would cost less in other cities). Maybe this isn't expensive to
some, but it was to me. I'm glad I shelled out the dough, though. It has
been a good scale for me. It also looks nice, with a warm wood finish.

Cat

"Ignoramus1091" wrote in message
...
How much did it cost?

i

In article et, Cat
wrote:
I have a digital scale made by "Thinner". It passed the weight test. I
first
weighed myself. Then I held a can that was 1.5 lbs. and weighed again.
The
scale faithfully registered the added weight. Then I went back and
weighed
again without the can. Scale weighed accurately.

My scale is vindicated. : It should be...it cost enough!

Cat

Buy a new scale?

--
Email me at:
perpleglow(AT)comcast.net


"Ignoramus10003" wrote in message
...
It has an interesting "feature". Let's say I step on it. It displays a
certain weight, let's say 176.2. I step back from it, step on it
again, and voila, the weight is always exactly the same. 176.2. Great
you say? Very consistent? Not really. I step back, take a 1 lb weight,
step on the scale with that weight, but the scale displays the same
old 176.2! Now if I take a 5 lb weight and step on it, it would
display a new weight. I take 5lb new weight off, step on the scale
again without a weight, and NOW it displays a new weight say 176.8.

What does this mean? It means that the scale (digital) is programmed
to display not its actual reading, but the previous reading if the
weight did not change much in comparison. It is programmed to hide its
inconsistency so that the consumers think it is extremely accurate,
which it is not.

I would rather have an inconsistent scale than the scale that is
essentially lying. But I know how to defeat it and I got used to it. I
am a computer programmer, that's why I became interested in this
problem.

i
223/176/180

In article , Ignoramus26947
wrote:

In article uV1lb.829160$YN5.899583@sccrnsc01, Perple Glow wrote:
Buy a new scale?

Good question.... I figured that I can live with what I have...

More for less is not always a bargain. Bell Canada is offering a bundle
promotion in Ontario right now to sane $240 a year-- digital TV, Dial
Up Internet and a free mobile phone with no activation phones if you
subscribe to a specifiued monthly option. . When you try to consider
your own needs the bundle doesn't always apply so for me it gave more
but less of what I use. I usually agree with Nies Van de Rohe, "Less is
More."

--
Diva
*****
The Best Man for the Job May Be A Woman

Damn, my typing is getting worse

In article , Carol Frilegh
wrote:

In article , Ignoramus26947
wrote:

In article uV1lb.829160$YN5.899583@sccrnsc01, Perple Glow wrote:
Buy a new scale?

Good question.... I figured that I can live with what I have...

More for less is not always a bargain. Bell Canada is offering a bundle
promotion in Ontario right now to sane $240 a year-- digital TV, Dial
Up Internet and a free mobile phone with no activation fee if you
subscribe to a specified monthly option. . When you try to consider
your own needs the bundle doesn't always apply so for me it gave more
but less of what I use. I usually agree with Mies Van de Rohe, "Less is
More."

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:14:29 -0400, Carol Frilegh
wrote:

but less of what I use. I usually agree with Nies Van de Rohe, "Less is
More."

I have Mies Van de Rohe Brno chairs in my dining room. They're enough
for me G.


Barbara Hirsch, Publisher
OBESITY MEDS AND RESEARCH NEWS
The latest in obesity research and weight loss drug development
http://www.obesity-news.com/