Cafe Yulong

[Eric Griswold]

These people just keep getting it right.

I was in a cranky mood so my wunnerful SO offered to buy me dinner.

Walnut Shrimp
Baby Bok Choy & Mushrooms

The soft but aldente mushrooms went perfectly with the crunchy walnuts and
not-greasy shrimp.

The service was crisp but not hurried; the tab beyond reasonable.

Since I've lost Cascal as a regular haunt with their new nearly no
small-plates menu; it's nice to have something special but still
cheaper-than-Zucca.


Other Mountain View food: I keep having visions of a trad. stainless
steel diner taking over Der Weinerschnizel corner. I'd give eyeteeth
for a place that'll serve up a good omelet n' coffee for breakfast.
[Charros works in its own way but an alternate would be great.]

Vivaca (if I got the spelling right) now has a sign indicating a new
Indian place; sheesh, just what we need.

Eric

[Todd Michel McComb]

Post by Eric Griswold
Since I've lost Cascal as a regular haunt with their new nearly
no small-plates menu

Oh? This must have happened while I was on vacation this summer.
What's the story? This would be a real loss for me too.

Post by Eric Griswold
Vivaca (if I got the spelling right) now has a sign indicating a
new Indian place; sheesh, just what we need.

Sheesh indeed. But it looks like we're getting a gyros place very
soon, which is certainly welcome. On the Indian front, any news
on Maharaja supposedly reappearing in the Florentine space with a
new name?

[Eric Griswold]

Post by Todd Michel McComb

Post by Eric Griswold
Since I've lost Cascal as a regular haunt with their new nearly
no small-plates menu

Oh? This must have happened while I was on vacation this summer.
What's the story? This would be a real loss for me too.

They made a new menu. Prices went up, many of the small plates
disappeared, (like manchego and quince paste, ARRG!) and portions
increased to American "combo plate" proportions rather than
the previous racion/medio-racion -sized stuff.

Eric

[Todd Michel McComb]

Post by Eric Griswold
They made a new menu. Prices went up, many of the small plates
disappeared, (like manchego and quince paste, ARRG!) and portions
increased to American "combo plate" proportions rather than
the previous racion/medio-racion -sized stuff.

I did just look at the redone tapas menu on their web site. There
seem to be some new offerings there, as well as various tweaks. On
the surface it looks like it could be an improvement, but being
geared more toward one-plate meals would be a shame. It really
seems bizarre, since their web site (not to mention all the reviews
they quote) heavily touts the small plate angle.

I'll make it in there again before too long, I'm sure, and hope we
still like it. At least with a family of 5, we can juggle the
larger portion issue if necessary. We haven't been eating out since
our big summer trip, though; too much restaurant food for a while.

[Steve Fenwick]

Post by Todd Michel McComb

Post by Eric Griswold
They made a new menu. Prices went up, many of the small plates
disappeared, (like manchego and quince paste, ARRG!) and portions
increased to American "combo plate" proportions rather than
the previous racion/medio-racion -sized stuff.

I did just look at the redone tapas menu on their web site. There
seem to be some new offerings there, as well as various tweaks. On
the surface it looks like it could be an improvement, but being
geared more toward one-plate meals would be a shame. It really
seems bizarre, since their web site (not to mention all the reviews
they quote) heavily touts the small plate angle.

Shameless plug for one's own review:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?q=cascal+group:ba.food+author:fenwick&hl
=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&newwindow=1&safe=off&selm=nospam-A6718D.00371318072004%4
0news.apple.com&rnum=1>


Since Herself has developed a taste (finally!) for Thai, I've been able
to swap in Amarin and The World's Best Soup as an alternate (and a
cheaper one, to boot). That, and wildly over-the-top late lunches at
Left Bank.

Post by Todd Michel McComb
I'll make it in there again before too long, I'm sure, and hope we
still like it.

Please post a follow-up!

Steve

[Todd Michel McComb]

Hmm, the dishes you miss aren't ones I liked. Indeed, that review
happened while I was out of town.

[Steve Fenwick]

Post by Todd Michel McComb
Hmm, the dishes you miss aren't ones I liked. Indeed, that review
happened while I was out of town.

Yes, and I haven't written to the owner as I mentioned. But they still
seem to be packed on a regular basis, so I suspect that they're just
maximizing profit in a healthy Capitalistic way.

Steve

[Todd Michel McComb]

it looks like we're getting a gyros place very soon

In fact, it is open now, and I ate there today. As might be expected
for this area, it seems to be run by Turks, rather than Greeks.

I got the lamb/beef gyro "sandwich" which was pretty good, and
something I'd eat again. They have nicely crisped slices of "gyro
meat" on the rotating spit, and serve it with sauce (yoghurt and
tahini) and vegetables wrapped in a nicely grilled lavash flat
bread. It's not a particularly good value, though, at $6.95.

That's all I ate. They also had various kebabs (sandwich and plate),
as well as the standard mediterranean cold appetizers, and less
prevalent items such as borek. The latter has definite appeal, so
we'll see. Oh, and they have "true" chicken gyros, in that they
have a rotating slab of pressed-together chicken meat ready to
slice.

It's a counter place with some bare-bones tables. I'm happy it's
here. Oh, and location: On Castro in Mountain View, between Villa
and Dana.

[Dave Kearns]

Post by Todd Michel McComb
In fact, it is open now, and I ate there today. As might be

expected

Post by Todd Michel McComb
for this area, it seems to be run by Turks, rather than Greeks.
That's all I ate. They also had various kebabs (sandwich and

plate),

Post by Todd Michel McComb
as well as the standard mediterranean cold appetizers,

Do try the kebabs and let us know if they're better than Rose
market..... but a kebab "sandwich"?

-dave

[Todd Michel McComb]

Post by Dave Kearns
Do try the kebabs and let us know if they're better than Rose
market..... but a kebab "sandwich"?

Well, the sandwich is presumably kebabs wrapped in lavash. I didn't
try it though, and probably won't be trying the kebabs anytime soon.
(They really aren't my thing, although Rose Market -- and quite
possibly this place -- do make them pretty well.)

I went to Gyro's House again today, and wanted to try the borek
("homemade pie"), but they were out of all flavors. I got the
cacik, which is a yoghurt mixture with vegetables and herbs. It
was quite good, but I'm a sucker for yoghurt. It was served with
"homemade bread," which was a oily flat bread, more or less like
foccacia, but in individual serving loaves. I got the dolmas instead
of the borek, seeing as it was so warm today, and they were good...
80 percentile or so dolmas. I'm sort of spoiled there since one
of my mother's coworkers was Macedonian, and made great dolmas.
Anyway, these had excellent grape leaf flavor, and weren't too bland
otherwise, including raisins & pine nuts in the filling.

To reiterate, this is a counter place, but they seem to be taking
their food pretty seriously. Prices aren't super-low (dolmas=$5,
cacik=$4), but not that bad. I'm going to continue eating here
with some regularity, I think. Mountain View had been sorely lacking
in this sort of food.

I believe that Gyro's House joins Zucca as Turkish-owned restaurants
describing themselves as "Mediterranean." In this case, I don't
know why they don't just call themselves Turkish (well, perhaps the
reason is I am totally wrong about that).

[Todd Michel McComb]

Post by Todd Michel McComb
I went to Gyro's House again today, and wanted to try the borek
("homemade pie"), but they were out of all flavors.

I've been a few more times since then, and they've been out of borek
every time. I had their Baba Ghanouj today, and it was outstanding.
Served with their focaccia-like bread, it makes a meal in itself
at $5. I am going to continue to badger them for borek until I get
some.

These guys continue to be a bit chaotic, but they make good food.

[Yip Yap]

Post by Todd Michel McComb
These guys continue to be a bit chaotic, but they make good food.

Gonna hafta try it some time. But isn't Cafe Yulong still
in business over on Dana Street?

-- Yip

[Todd Michel McComb]

But isn't Cafe Yulong still in business over on Dana Street?

Yes. I think Dave did the thread change, and maybe it wasn't that
clear. This started as a thread about Cafe Yulong. Gyro's House
is on Castro, in the former Chef Liu former Chef Wang spot.

[Danny Low]

Post by Eric Griswold
I'd give eyeteeth
for a place that'll serve up a good omelet n' coffee for breakfast.
[Charros works in its own way but an alternate would be great.]

I am partial to the Country Gourmet on El Camino and Rengstoff. Their
coffee is excellent and they have very good omelets. The Shoreline
Grill and Deli on Rengstoff at 101 in the Costco center now serves
breakfast. They have a very nice Italian omelet.

Danny

Don't question authority. What makes you think they
know anything? (Remove the first dot for a valid e-mail
address)

[Steve Fenwick]

Post by Eric Griswold
These people just keep getting it right.
I was in a cranky mood so my wunnerful SO offered to buy me dinner.
Walnut Shrimp
Baby Bok Choy & Mushrooms
The soft but aldente mushrooms went perfectly with the crunchy walnuts and
not-greasy shrimp.
The service was crisp but not hurried; the tab beyond reasonable.

Beyond these choices, what is a list of regularly good items there? We
went once and apparently ordered poorly, as our meal was only mediocre.

Post by Eric Griswold
Other Mountain View food: I keep having visions of a trad. stainless
steel diner taking over Der Weinerschnizel corner. I'd give eyeteeth
for a place that'll serve up a good omelet n' coffee for breakfast.
[Charros works in its own way but an alternate would be great.]

Possibly not traditional, but definitely stainless steel, appears to be
going in kitty-corner to ex-Vivaca. I'm thinking Bandera crossed with
the Terminator.

Post by Eric Griswold
Vivaca (if I got the spelling right) now has a sign indicating a new
Indian place; sheesh, just what we need.

We could use a really good Indian place, not just another buffet. Why is
it that *all* Indian restaurants in this area seem to centered around a
buffet?

Steve

[Max Hauser]

Post by Steve Fenwick
We could use a really good Indian place, not just another
buffet. Why is it that *all* Indian restaurants in this area
seem to centered around a buffet?

It seems to be, Steve, that buffets are what "we" consumers demand. This
subject was discussed earnestly here (a dozen years ago) when Jeanne Bonk
converted her lunch service at _Empress of India_ on El Camino from a
daily-special (no printed menu) to a buffet. I believe that some people
complained then too (I believe one of them was me), but when asked, she
explained sympathetically that this was what the market expected.

-- Max

[Todd Michel McComb]

Post by Max Hauser
It seems to be, Steve, that buffets are what "we" consumers demand.

Yes, it's really unfortunate. Turmerik started with really good
menu food, for instance, and then added a buffet. Then on our most
recent visit, almost seemed determined to "make" us eat the buffet
(for dinner, no less). I declined politely a couple of times, and
ultimately expressed my dismay with the whole situation. At that
point, they were apologetic and served us a nice meal. Since then,
it seems they've changed their format entirely. It's possible that
the new format continues to offer something good, but the entire
sequence seems unfortunate.

I don't have a problem with many restaurants offering a buffet, if
that's what people want, but since when does every restaurant have
to be the same? That's just dumb, but also buoyed by -- apparently
-- consumer images of an "Indian restaurant" as a very narrowly
defined entity. I'm sure this will change eventually.

[Mean Green Dancing Machine]

Post by Todd Michel McComb
I don't have a problem with many restaurants offering a buffet, if
that's what people want, but since when does every restaurant have
to be the same? That's just dumb, but also buoyed by -- apparently
-- consumer images of an "Indian restaurant" as a very narrowly
defined entity. I'm sure this will change eventually.

While my situation is far from typical, I normally eat at Indian
restaurants by myself (my primary partner is allergic so something in
Indian food served at restaurants -- no reaction when I make things at
home). And most Indian restaurants without a buffet make it difficult
or impossible for me to get the balance of foods I want (particularly
WRT meat/veggie balance).

On the gripping hand, this is also true for many non-Indian restaurants;
generally only Chinese and Thai restaurants are good for me this way.

[Todd Michel McComb]

And most Indian restaurants without a buffet make it difficult or
impossible for me to get the balance of foods I want (particularly
WRT meat/veggie balance).

I'm a bit perplexed by this statement. The ordinary American-style
Indian restaurant generally serves a main course with a couple of
vegetable sides.

Anyway, I certainly have no issue with the existence of Indian
buffets. I might even want one occasionally (as opposed to Chinese
food, which is pretty much uniformly awful on a buffet, Indian
curries are fairly well suited to that treatment). But who wants
all Indian restaurants -- or anything, for that matter -- to be the
same? That's my gripe: That certain sorts of restaurants feel
(or that the public feels) they _have_ to serve a specific set of
dishes, even if I can already get them next door.

[Glenn S. Tenney KCTJ CISSP]

Post by Todd Michel McComb

And most Indian restaurants without a buffet make it difficult or
impossible for me to get the balance of foods I want (particularly
WRT meat/veggie balance).

I'm a bit perplexed by this statement. The ordinary American-style
Indian restaurant generally serves a main course with a couple of
vegetable sides.

The majority of BA Indian restaurants that I've been to are mostly all
"ala carte" -- if you want a side dish or two, they're all extra as the
entree comes by itself sometimes even the rice is extra. Some places do
have a "complete dinner" option with the more traditional small bowls
with dal/veggie/raita/etc., but certainly not the majority from my
experience.

[Todd Michel McComb]

Some places do have a "complete dinner" option with the more
traditional small bowls with dal/veggie/raita/etc., but certainly
not the majority from my experience.

Hmm, I guess Mountain View must be skewed toward that option. Pretty
much every menu I've seen in a generic Americanized Indian place
has two columns, one "a la carte" and one "(thali) dinner." Although
with as many new Indian places as have opened, that might not even
be true here anymore.

That new place in Vivaca's old spot, which sparked this subthread,
claims it is premium in some as-yet-undetermined way. I haven't
checked it out yet, but it's certainly in a much fancier restaurant
space than most.

Oh course, we have Amber here also, which gets a lot of good press.
The proliferation of chaat houses seems like a more interesting
phenomenon, generally. Saravana Bhavan (real South Indian) moved
to Sunnyvale, though.

[ll]

I normally eat at Indian restaurants by myself .... And most
Indian restaurants without a buffet make it difficult
or impossible for me to get the balance of foods I want

I absolutely agree. Even with two people, it's difficult to get
a _broad_ variety of dishes. This is the reason that when it's just
the two of us we rarely go to Chinese or Indian places for dinner.

The Teenager can eat his weight in tandoori chicken and nan
at lunch buffets. (We tip good to compensate the restaurant
for his appetite.)

I'm a bit perplexed by this statement. The ordinary American-style
Indian restaurant generally serves a main course with a couple of
vegetable sides.

Well I'm _completely_ baffled by this statement. I probably go to
more Indian restaurants than most in this NG (although fewer on
the peninsula and SB) and I only know of one Indian restaurant
that serves (at dinner time) what might be called "European-style":
main dish item with a couple of vegetable sides. (Masala in Danville,
which we've never gone to because we think that it is not "authentic".)

They virtually all (at dinner time) have menus that offer separate
meat and separate vegetable dishes, with vegetable dishes costing
as much as the meat dishes. Which is a whole other issue WRT the
food cost component of menu prices.

on the supply side it tilts towards the {buffet] because buffets
are easier.

Well, that's not a universal truth. It's easier "the way they
usually do them" would be more accurate. One way we judge Indian
places is by their (lunch) buffet. If the quality is high,
that's a good sign, because it's sooo easy to do a crappy buffet.
If they care enough to do it well, it usually means that their
dinner service is good. Some of the components of good lunch
buffets are: nan and tandoori chicken made to order, not sitting
around on the steam table; high quality ingredients in the curries,
good service (clearing the plates, etc.), .... Janta in Pleasanton
is our current favorite, overall.

Two Indian places in Berkeley that do not do buffets at lunch
are Ajanta, and Vic's.

Vik's isn't a good example, since it's a "small plates" place.
(The Chinese (dim sum) and the Indians (chaat) invented small plates
centuries before tapas.)

[Steve Pope]

Post by ll

on the supply side it tilts towards the buffet because buffets
are easier.

Well, that's not a universal truth.

No, but there's a trend in that direction. This is what I mean
by "tilts towards".

Post by ll
Some of the components of good lunch buffets are: nan and
tandoori chicken made to order, not sitting around on the
steam table;

To the extent they're preparing food to order, then it is
not a buffet. So what you're saying is non-buffet Indian
food is better. If so, I agree.

Steve

[ll]

Post by Steve Pope
To the extent they're preparing food to order,
then it is not a buffet.

Not at all. There are some Indian lunch _buffet_ places
that instead of putting tandoori chicken and nan in a hotel pan
on the steam table, they cook it to order for each table.
It fits every other definition of "buffet" except sitting
in a pan getting cold and stale, i.e., it is "all you can eat".
It is also hot, fresh, and (usually) high quality.

Shortly after you sit down from getting your first plate
of food, they deliver -- unasked -- fresh tandoori chicken
and nan to your table. The places with good service even
come by and ask you during your lunch if you'd like more.
But you can always ask.

[Steve Pope]

Post by ll

Post by Steve Pope
To the extent they're preparing food to order,
then it is not a buffet.

Not at all. There are some Indian lunch _buffet_ places
that instead of putting tandoori chicken and nan in a hotel pan
on the steam table, they cook it to order for each table.
It fits every other definition of "buffet" except sitting
in a pan getting cold and stale, i.e., it is "all you can eat".
It is also hot, fresh, and (usually) high quality.

Right, it's cooked to order, so it's by definition not a buffet
item.

But if you disagree, then how do you define the word "buffet" ?

Steve

[Todd Michel McComb]

It fits every other definition of "buffet" except sitting in a pan
getting cold and stale, i.e., it is "all you can eat".

As far as I'm concerned, the former is the only definition of a
buffet (it's certainly the etymology). Many buffets are all you
can eat, but I've been to all-you-can eat places that aren't buffets,
and buffets that aren't all you can eat (one time through). The
latter is rare, but the former isn't so rare.

[ll]

Post by Todd Michel McComb
As far as I'm concerned, the former is the only definition
of a buffet

OK, it's time for the math majors to put on their thinking caps.

I mentioned a "buffet" where _all but two_ items were sitting around
in a pan getting cold (which appears to be the canonical definition
that some ascribe to a buffet). Which, I claim, is nonsense. :)

Have you ever seen a buffet where they have a big sign outside:
"N Item Buffet!". Swagat used to do this, where n = 31 if
I remember correctly. (Concord)

I now describe a, uh, "buffet" where there M items are served.
N of those items are made to order and all-you-can-eat.

As M approaches infinity and N goes asymptotic to 0,
would someone argue that this is _never_ a buffet?

Extra points for showing your work.
Slide rules are allowed, but no TI-89's.

And the point is (and there is one) that many things in life
are not black and white. Sometimes you have to think.

Is that a station wagon or an SUV?
Is that Italian food or California cuisine?
Is that person M or N? (Go to Hawaii some time and try
to figure that out.)

[Steve Pope]

Post by ll
I now describe a, uh, "buffet" where there M items are served.
N of those items are made to order and all-you-can-eat.
As M approaches infinity and N goes asymptotic to 0,
would someone argue that this is _never_ a buffet?

The atecedent to the word "this" in your question is a bit
unclear.

If "this" refers to all items being served, then for nonzero N it is
not correct to call "this" a buffet without further qualification.
"This" is composed of some buffet items, and some made-to-order items.

Post by ll
And the point is (and there is one) that many things in life
are not black and white. Sometimes you have to think.

Some of us just like to use language with precision is all.
Why not refer to it as an all-you-can-eat lunch which is largely,
but not entirely, a buffet.

Steve

[Todd Michel McComb]

Post by ll
And the point is (and there is one) that many things in life
are not black and white. Sometimes you have to think.

That's exactly the point, I agree, which is why I would say that
your example serves a mostly buffet lunch with some non-buffet
items.

If we're going to be very precise, then I also think there's a
distinction between freshly served "in the pipeline" (i.e. they
figure beforehand they can cook X amount) food, and actual made-to-order
food. Now there's a distinction which can truly be asymptotic....

[Ciccio]

Post by Todd Michel McComb
That's exactly the point, I agree, which is why I would say that
your example serves a mostly buffet lunch with some non-buffet
items.

Is there a place like that for dinner, like the ol' Planet Bollywood?

Ciccio

[lisa]

Post by ll

Post by Steve Pope
To the extent they're preparing food to order,
then it is not a buffet.

Not at all. There are some Indian lunch _buffet_ places
that instead of putting tandoori chicken and nan in a hotel pan
on the steam table, they cook it to order for each table.
It fits every other definition of "buffet" except sitting
in a pan getting cold and stale, i.e., it is "all you can eat".
It is also hot, fresh, and (usually) high quality.
Shortly after you sit down from getting your first plate
of food, they deliver -- unasked -- fresh tandoori chicken
and nan to your table. The places with good service even
come by and ask you during your lunch if you'd like more.
But you can always ask.

Bombay Garden in Newark gives you the fresh naan. Chicken's on the
steam table though. I really like BG because of the giant video screen
playing Bollywood songs and the wide offering of South Indian stuff
like appam and idli/sambar. Haven't been to the one in San Mateo
though.
Lisa

[Al Eisner]

Post by Mean Green Dancing Machine

Post by Todd Michel McComb
I don't have a problem with many restaurants offering a buffet, if
that's what people want, but since when does every restaurant have
to be the same? That's just dumb, but also buoyed by -- apparently
-- consumer images of an "Indian restaurant" as a very narrowly
defined entity. I'm sure this will change eventually.

While my situation is far from typical, I normally eat at Indian
restaurants by myself (my primary partner is allergic so something in
Indian food served at restaurants -- no reaction when I make things at
home). And most Indian restaurants without a buffet make it difficult
or impossible for me to get the balance of foods I want (particularly
WRT meat/veggie balance).

A number of Indian restaurants on the Peninsula - e.g., Suraj in Redwood
City and, I think, the Swagats - serve a wide range of thali dinners, i.e.,
any entree with the addition of vegetable sides. This can be very
filling, but it is certainly well balanced, and the extra cost is small.
Other places, such as Amber, are basically a la carte, with only limited
options for balanced combinations.

[Mean Green Dancing Machine]

Post by Al Eisner

Post by Mean Green Dancing Machine
While my situation is far from typical, I normally eat at Indian
restaurants by myself (my primary partner is allergic so something in
Indian food served at restaurants -- no reaction when I make things at
home). And most Indian restaurants without a buffet make it difficult
or impossible for me to get the balance of foods I want (particularly
WRT meat/veggie balance).

A number of Indian restaurants on the Peninsula - e.g., Suraj in Redwood
City and, I think, the Swagats - serve a wide range of thali dinners, i.e.,
any entree with the addition of vegetable sides. This can be very
filling, but it is certainly well balanced, and the extra cost is small.
Other places, such as Amber, are basically a la carte, with only limited
options for balanced combinations.

My experience with such places (specifically e.g. Suraj) is that the
sides would be better termed vegetarian than vegetable. IOW, I don't
consider lentils to be a vegetable -- it's a starch, for the purpose of
determining its nutritional value.

[Todd Michel McComb]

Post by Mean Green Dancing Machine
My experience with such places (specifically e.g. Suraj) is that
the sides would be better termed vegetarian than vegetable.

Ah, well, isn't that a general problem on Indian buffets too?

[Mean Green Dancing Machine]

Post by Todd Michel McComb

Post by Mean Green Dancing Machine
My experience with such places (specifically e.g. Suraj) is that
the sides would be better termed vegetarian than vegetable.

Ah, well, isn't that a general problem on Indian buffets too?

Not quite as bad; Indian food typically has a number of vegetable
entrees.

[Al Eisner]

Post by Mean Green Dancing Machine

Post by Al Eisner

Post by Mean Green Dancing Machine
While my situation is far from typical, I normally eat at Indian
restaurants by myself (my primary partner is allergic so something in
Indian food served at restaurants -- no reaction when I make things at
home). And most Indian restaurants without a buffet make it difficult
or impossible for me to get the balance of foods I want (particularly
WRT meat/veggie balance).

A number of Indian restaurants on the Peninsula - e.g., Suraj in Redwood
City and, I think, the Swagats - serve a wide range of thali dinners, i.e.,
any entree with the addition of vegetable sides. This can be very
filling, but it is certainly well balanced, and the extra cost is small.
Other places, such as Amber, are basically a la carte, with only limited
options for balanced combinations.

My experience with such places (specifically e.g. Suraj) is that the
sides would be better termed vegetarian than vegetable. IOW, I don't
consider lentils to be a vegetable -- it's a starch, for the purpose of
determining its nutritional value.

Yeah, that is a problem. I've never gotten used to the fact that at
Indian restaurants potatoes are given equal treatment as vegetables -
in fact, anything except rice and bread is. Nonetheless, typically one
of the Suraj sides is a "genuine" vegetable, although one might be unlucky
on a given day.

[Michael Sierchio]

... I've never gotten used to the fact that at
Indian restaurants potatoes are given equal treatment as vegetables -
in fact, anything except rice and bread is. Nonetheless, typically one
of the Suraj sides is a "genuine" vegetable, although one might be unlucky
on a given day.

Applebee's -- "The vegetable of the day is macaroni and cheese"

[Steve Pope]

Post by Al Eisner
Yeah, that is a problem. I've never gotten used to the fact
that at Indian restaurants potatoes are given equal treatment
as vegetables - in fact, anything except rice and bread is.
Nonetheless, typically one of the Suraj sides is a "genuine"
vegetable, although one might be unlucky on a given day.

I typically see Indian vegetable dishes consisting of potatoes,
cauliflower, okra, eggplant, spinach, peas, lentils or garbanzo
beans as the main vegetable ingredient, with tomato, onion and
spices usually forming the sauce.

I don't see this as any sort of problem or issue.

My main problem is the fat content of these dishes as typically
prepared -- it's totally unnecessary.

Steve

[Rajan P. Parrikar]

I typically see Indian vegetable dishes...with tomato, onion and
spices usually forming the sauce.

This is true only of the Punjabi-inspired dishes
which (unfortunately) have come to represent Indian
cuisine in America. The West, South, and East Indian
items employ very different ideas and even within
these there is significant regional diversity.

My main problem is the fat content of these dishes as typically
prepared -- it's totally unnecessary.

Again, this may be laid at the door of uncouth Punjabi
cooks.


Warm regards,


r

[Steve Pope]

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar

I typically see Indian vegetable dishes...with tomato, onion and
spices usually forming the sauce.

This is true only of the Punjabi-inspired dishes
which (unfortunately) have come to represent Indian
cuisine in America. The West, South, and East Indian
items employ very different ideas and even within
these there is significant regional diversity.

It would be nice to find some of this diversity. Even when
I see dishes listed as being from these other regions, including
from outside of India entirely (Pakistani, Afghani etc.)
there is an amazing same-ness.

Where do I find some of these "very different ideas"????

Steve

[Todd Michel McComb]

Post by Steve Pope
Where do I find some of these "very different ideas"????

We're starting to get some real regional Indian cuisine in the South
Bay. It's been discussed fairly regularly here. You could try
Dasaprakash or Saravana Bhavan for South Indian food. The growing
number of chaat houses also don't serve "Indian restaurant food."

[Steve Pope]

Post by Todd Michel McComb

Post by Steve Pope
Where do I find some of these "very different ideas"????

We're starting to get some real regional Indian cuisine in the South
Bay. It's been discussed fairly regularly here. You could try
Dasaprakash or Saravana Bhavan for South Indian food. The growing
number of chaat houses also don't serve "Indian restaurant food."

Nods.

I would be happy to learn that Dasaprakash or Saravana Bhavan are
lower fat than typical stateside Indian places, then make a note
of doing them sometime when passing through the southbay.

Up here, beyond the standard Americanized Indian (Punjabi?) we have
chaat and dosa places but that's about it.

Steve

[alee]

Post by Steve Pope
I would be happy to learn that Dasaprakash or Saravana Bhavan are
lower fat than typical stateside Indian places, then make a note
of doing them sometime when passing through the southbay.

Indeed they are. They still use a liberal amount of ghee, but it's not
nearly as much fat as you'll find in a typical buffet. When a lamb
curry is swimming in half an inch of fat, you're know there's a problem.

My favarote south Indian dive is Madras Cafe in Sunnyvale. Paper
plates, plastic forks, and the best sambar vada in the area. I haven't
been back to Saravana Bhavan since I found this place.

Another recent find has been Komala Villas, again in Sunnyvale. They've
been there for years, but have recently changed their menu (due to new
owners?). At one time, they served set dosas and other south Indian
vegetarian fare. Now, you don't order. Servers walk around with
buckets of food and serve you whatever they felt like making that
day...normally half a dozen items, all vegetarian, all very tasty, and
all with very little fat. As long as you're hungry, they'll keep
slopping food on your plate. $8/person for lunch. If you want fat, go
to the Dhaba which is a few doors down from this place.

--A

[Rajan P. Parrikar]

Post by alee

Post by Steve Pope
I would be happy to learn that Dasaprakash or Saravana Bhavan are
lower fat than typical stateside Indian places, then make a note
of doing them sometime when passing through the southbay.

Indeed they are. They still use a liberal amount of ghee, but it's not
nearly as much fat as you'll find in a typical buffet. When a lamb
curry is swimming in half an inch of fat, you're know there's a problem.
My favarote south Indian dive is Madras Cafe in Sunnyvale. Paper
plates, plastic forks, and the best sambar vada in the area. I haven't
been back to Saravana Bhavan since I found this place.
Another recent find has been Komala Villas, again in Sunnyvale. They've
been there for years, but have recently changed their menu (due to new
owners?).

The food at Saravana Bhavan is outstanding, but it is
overpriced. Dasaprakash is a notch lower in food, but
is quieter, roomier and has a much better ambience (I
have not been to the new locale of Saravana Bhavan).
At either place, you can request dosas/chapatis
without ghee/oil/less oil.

Komala Vilas (http://www.komalavilas.com) is owned
by an ex-techhie (the "Dos to Dosa" dude) and serves
authentic Tamil brahmin cuisine. It is the only
restaurant in the Bay Area that offers truly homestyle
fare. You can eat it everyday without adverse effect
on body and soul. The 'unlimited lunch thali' is
especially recommended. For $8 you can have your
fill and you don't have to leave a tip. You get
rice, sambar, rasam, 2 vegetables dishes (one dry
and the other with gravy), papadams/spiced potato chips,
chutney, and a sweet dish. Some of the items can
be fiery hot; girlie men are advised to stay away.
For the economic girlie men, there is at night a
"Recession thali" for $5. The restaurant also serves
items a la carte (dosas, upama, idlis, vada etc).
My peeve is that the sambar in the a la carte mode
is often dealt as if there is an embargo on it.
However, you can have as much as you want even if
it means having to ask for s refill 10 times. The
place is also open for breakfast (8.30 am - 11 am).
The overall maintenance of the premises leaves much
to be desired, but that applies to almost all Indian
restaurants here.

As for "regional cuisines" of India - I think
we are currently out of luck here in America.
I saw a restaurant offering the cuisine of Kerala
in Zurich. Goan food would be quite a hit here,
I think, but Goans would rather die than work.

Warm regards,


r

[Al Eisner]

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar
As for "regional cuisines" of India - I think
we are currently out of luck here in America.
I saw a restaurant offering the cuisine of Kerala
in Zurich. Goan food would be quite a hit here,
I think, but Goans would rather die than work.

I think I mentioned once before here that DeeDee's (at the edge of Palo
Alto/Mountainview) was serving four regional specials (from different
places) on successive Sundays. I don't know how respresentative these
are (and I haven't had a chance to try them) -- do you know anything
about that?

By the way, thanks for the rest of the post (the part I snipped) about
some very interesting restaurants I haven't yet tried, but would like to.
Very informative!

[Rajan P. Parrikar]

Post by Al Eisner
I think I mentioned once before here that DeeDee's (at the edge of Palo
Alto/Mountainview) was serving four regional specials (from different
places) on successive Sundays. I don't know how respresentative these
are (and I haven't had a chance to try them) -- do you know anything
about that?

DeeDee's offerings include several regional specialty
vegetarian items, primarily from the Gujarat area (since
Deedee and her uxorious husband are Gujaratis). But
I remember their buffet as having a sufficiently
wide (geographically) selection to qualify as a
pan-Indian restaurant.

Warm regards,


r

[Al Eisner]

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar

Post by Al Eisner
I think I mentioned once before here that DeeDee's (at the edge of Palo
Alto/Mountainview) was serving four regional specials (from different
places) on successive Sundays. I don't know how respresentative these
are (and I haven't had a chance to try them) -- do you know anything
about that?

DeeDee's offerings include several regional specialty
vegetarian items, primarily from the Gujarat area (since
Deedee and her uxorious husband are Gujaratis). But
I remember their buffet as having a sufficiently
wide (geographically) selection to qualify as a
pan-Indian restaurant.

The buffet, however, is weekdays only now (or at least it was the last
time I was there on a weekend). The posted menu noted a Sunday special
dinner, rotating among four regional cuisines, one of which (and
unfortunately the only one I remember) was Gujarati. But I haven't
made it there on a Sunday since I noticed that.

[Todd Michel McComb]

In article <***@flora05.slac.stanford.edu>,
Al Eisner <***@slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
[Re: DeeDee's]

The posted menu noted a Sunday special dinner, rotating among four
regional cuisines, one of which (and unfortunately the only one I
remember) was Gujarati.

I've seen (on their website) Turmerik offering (at least) Rajasthani
and Hyderabadi menus, but unfortunately I didn't have the chance
to try them. They seem to have stopped the rotating regional
specials, unfortunately.

I think we're on the verge of seeing a real proliferation of regional
Indian food.

[lisa]

Post by Al Eisner

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar
As for "regional cuisines" of India - I think
we are currently out of luck here in America.
I saw a restaurant offering the cuisine of Kerala
in Zurich. Goan food would be quite a hit here,
I think, but Goans would rather die than work.

I think I mentioned once before here that DeeDee's (at the edge of Palo
Alto/Mountainview) was serving four regional specials (from different
places) on successive Sundays. I don't know how respresentative these
are (and I haven't had a chance to try them) -- do you know anything
about that?
By the way, thanks for the rest of the post (the part I snipped) about
some very interesting restaurants I haven't yet tried, but would like to.
Very informative!

Right, DeeDee's is owned by Gujaratis and they do great Guju snacks.
Lisa

[Rajappa Iyer]

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar
The food at Saravana Bhavan is outstanding, but it is
overpriced. Dasaprakash is a notch lower in food, but
is quieter, roomier and has a much better ambience (I
have not been to the new locale of Saravana Bhavan).

Actually, I always found Dasaprakash to be just as good as Saravana
Bhavan and recently they seem to have improved the quality of their
chutneys (always their weak point). Plus, in terms of service, there
is no contest -- the wait staff at Saravana Bhavan seems to think that
they are doing you a big favor by letting you dine there.

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar
As for "regional cuisines" of India - I think
we are currently out of luck here in America.
I saw a restaurant offering the cuisine of Kerala
in Zurich. Goan food would be quite a hit here,
I think, but Goans would rather die than work.

Yeah, Goan or Keralite food would be a wonderful addition. As for the
Goan's indisposition to work, well wasn't there a nice fable about a
business guy trying to convince the local shopkeeper to expand? As I
recall, the exchange went something like:

Businessman: "Instead of taking siestas and hanging out you should
work harder and expand your business."

Goan: "Why would I do that?"

B: "So that you can make more money."

G: "What would I do with more money?"

B: "Well, you can buy a lot of things."

G: "But I don't need a lot of things."

B: "Well, you can pay someone to do all the work for you."

G: "Why would I do that?"

B: "So you can have more leisure time to enjoy... well, forget about it."

rsi

[Robert Klute]

Post by Rajappa Iyer
Yeah, Goan or Keralite food would be a wonderful addition.

I thought Spice Hut on Remington at El Camino in Sunnyvale served
Keralan dishes.

Do any restaurants in the BA serve Maharashtran dishes?

[ian maclure]

On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 15:41:28 -0700, Rajan P. Parrikar wrote:

[snip]

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar
I think, but Goans would rather die than work.

Ma<n+~>ana Disease?
Possibly acquired from the Portuguese?

IBM

_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

[alee]

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar
Komala Vilas (http://www.komalavilas.com)

<snip>

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar
For $8 you can have your fill and you don't
have to leave a tip.

Change "don't have to" to "don't".

During one of my visits, I paid at the register and got my change. I
then walked back to the table to leave a few bucks. The table was
already being cleared and the bus boy nodded with appreciation. The
owner lady saw me and said loudly and sternly, "No tipping! No
tipping!" The bus boy handed me my money back and I walked out.

Lunch is $8. No tax -or- tip.

--A

[Tim May]

Post by alee

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar
Komala Vilas (http://www.komalavilas.com)

<snip>

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar
For $8 you can have your fill and you don't
have to leave a tip.

Change "don't have to" to "don't".
During one of my visits, I paid at the register and got my change. I
then walked back to the table to leave a few bucks. The table was
already being cleared and the bus boy nodded with appreciation. The
owner lady saw me and said loudly and sternly, "No tipping! No
tipping!" The bus boy handed me my money back and I walked out.
Lunch is $8. No tax -or- tip.

This brings up an interesting issue. Since many restaurant workers have
an imputed tip amount, for IRS reasons, a place with "occasional
tipping" may be _worse_ for them than a place with "no tipping
allowed." At least if tipping is absent, the employees have a pretty
good case to make with the IRS that they are not being tipped, whereas
if tipping is spotty, the IRS could sock them with an estimated or
imputed tip rate that is way above what meager tips they are actually
getting.

Speaking of tips, the growing number of tip jars on fast food counters
shows how silly things have gotten. Do burger places really think we
should tip them? I hope an IRS auditor notices the tip jar and
announces that henceforth all employees will have to report a tip
amount based on IRS estimates.

--Tim May

[Todd Michel McComb]

At least if tipping is absent, the employees have a pretty good
case to make with the IRS that they are not being tipped, whereas
if tipping is spotty, the IRS could sock them with an estimated
or imputed tip rate that is way above what meager tips they are
actually getting.

This is a stunningly reasonable and relevant comment from Tim.

[Rajan P. Parrikar]

Post by alee
My favarote south Indian dive is Madras Cafe in Sunnyvale. Paper
plates, plastic forks, and the best sambar vada in the area. I haven't
been back to Saravana Bhavan since I found this place.

Madras Cafe (http://www.madrascafe.us) has some
excellent items at bargain prices. Chapati-channa ($2.75)
and Chapati-masala ($2.75) are among my favourites (you
can request the chapatis without ghee/butter/oil). The
vegetable biryani is delicious but it is a calorie-bomb.
I usually prefer a take-out since the paper plates and
plastic spoons/forks are a turn off, as are the cramped
premises and the unappetising selection & volume of music.

A local rag has advertisements for some new Indian
places in the area.

- Annapurna Cafe (1120 Elko Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94089)
Monday-Friday, serves Gujarati, Punjabi and South Indian
cuisine for lunch on successive days.

- Tiffins (3739 El Camino Real, Santa Clara, CA 95051) in
the Albertson PLaza. Serves Tandoori, Wraps and Kababs.

- Crossing the Bar (French-Indian restaurant), San Francisco.
http://www.crossingthebar.net


Warm regards,


r

[alee]

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar
Madras Cafe (http://www.madrascafe.us) has some
excellent items at bargain prices. Chapati-channa ($2.75)
and Chapati-masala ($2.75) are among my favourites (you
can request the chapatis without ghee/butter/oil).

In addition to their regular menu items, check the specials board. The
kothu parrata and madras parrata are wonderful.

--A

[Todd Michel McComb]

Post by Steve Pope
I would be happy to learn that Dasaprakash or Saravana Bhavan are
lower fat than typical stateside Indian places, then make a note
of doing them sometime when passing through the southbay.

Hmm. I'm not sure on that point. They're vegetarian, though. You
ought to just go. I can't really enjoy them, since I'm allergic
to most everything they serve, but the food is different. The lines
at Saravana Bhavan often filled the parking lot (they've since moved
from Mountain View to a - presumably larger - spot in Sunnyvale).

Post by Steve Pope
Up here, beyond the standard Americanized Indian (Punjabi?)

The classier label is "Mughlai." You know, Empire-type food.
Emperors like lots of fat, I guess.

[Rajan P. Parrikar]

Post by Todd Michel McComb

Post by Steve Pope
Up here, beyond the standard Americanized Indian (Punjabi?)

The classier label is "Mughlai." You know, Empire-type food.
Emperors like lots of fat, I guess.

Mughlai and Punjabi cuisines are not synonymous.


Warm regards,


r

[Todd Michel McComb]

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar
Mughlai and Punjabi cuisines are not synonymous.

Care to articulate the difference, especially as regards particular
dishes? It certainly makes sense that they're different, but from
what I've seen, the two menus start to blend together.

[Rajan P. Parrikar]

Post by Todd Michel McComb

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar
Mughlai and Punjabi cuisines are not synonymous.

Care to articulate the difference, especially as regards particular
dishes?

The Mughlai cuisine was perfected during the Mughal
rule in India beginning in the 16th C. The food is rich,
and typically involves meat preparations with curds,
cream, milk, crushed nuts etc. Some well-known Mughlai
dishes are the Biryani, Korma, Kofta, and Kababs. Delhi,
Lucknow and Hyderabad are especially renowned for
outstanding Mughlai food. Butter Chicken takes its
inspiration from Mughlai.

Punjabi sauces are based in a mictures of onions, garlic,
ginger and tomatoes. Dishes include the familiar Sarson ka
Saag (Spinach and Mustard Greens), Baingan Bharta (roasted
eggplant in spices), Paratha, Aloo Gobi, Aloo Matter,
Chhole-Bhatura, and the ubiquitous Tandoori specialties.
And Lassi. While each region of India has its own manner
of preparing daal, the daal served in restaurants
is typically made Punjabi-style.

Post by Todd Michel McComb
It certainly makes sense that they're different, but from
what I've seen, the two menus start to blend together.

A generic (North) Indian restaurant here will offer a
catalogue of Punjabi and Mughlai items. Hence your
perception.

Warm regards,


r

[Al Eisner]

Post by Rajan P. Parrikar

Post by Todd Michel McComb

Post by Steve Pope
Up here, beyond the standard Americanized Indian (Punjabi?)

The classier label is "Mughlai." You know, Empire-type food.
Emperors like lots of fat, I guess.

Mughlai and Punjabi cuisines are not synonymous.

Sorry to be slightly nasty about this, but your post could be described
as having negative information content. That is, it takes something we
thought we knew (Todd's statement) and tells us it is false, without
substituting something which is true. Please help us out here!
(Of course, lots of posts here have zero or less information content,
but in this case the information would be interesting, so ....)
Thanks in advance.

[Todd Michel McComb]

That is, it takes something we thought we knew (Todd's statement)
and tells us it is false

Well, let me be clear. I have seen both labels applied to what
seemed like pretty much the same food (i.e. "Indian restaurant
food"). I find it easy to believe that they are somewhat different
(city v. country, etc., in a broad sense), but I don't know precisely
how. I hope Rajan can articulate this, because as you say, it would
be interesting.

[ll]

I have seen both labels applied to what seemed like pretty much
the same food (i.e. "Indian restaurant food").

That's no different than all the Chinese restaurants that
proudly proclaim "Szechwan and Cantonese Cuisine".
Usually it means nothing. It's just marketing nonsense.


Ob.Chinese.Food: We've been back to Chef Chan's (S.R.).
There is a three dish, $17.50 menu at dinner time, _but_ they
don't give it to you. You have to know about it and ask for it.

I discovered it while waiting for a table at lunch time and
perusing the stack of dinner menus by the front door. When
we returned for dinner one night we asked for that menu.

Their non-dim-sum dishes are kind of bland. But maybe that's
just "authentic Cantonese cuisine".

[Todd Michel McComb]

Post by ll
That's no different than all the Chinese restaurants that
proudly proclaim "Szechwan and Cantonese Cuisine".
Usually it means nothing. It's just marketing nonsense.

Well, I've never seen the Indian restaurants themselves use these
labels. Have you? They just call it "Indian food."

[ll]

Post by Steve Pope
It would be nice to find some of this diversity. Even when
I see dishes listed as being from these other regions, including
from outside of India entirely (Pakistani, Afghani etc.)
there is an amazing same-ness.

New Delhi Junction (on Telegraph) did just that before they closed,
moved north, and reopened as Ajanta. We always ordered off the
regional menu, never off the standard menu. The food was different
and very good.

Post by Steve Pope
Where do I find some of these "very different ideas"????

Udupi Palace in Newark is different. Lots of little bowls
of vegetables, some of them different from commonly found
Indian fare.

[Tim May]

Post by ll

Post by Steve Pope
It would be nice to find some of this diversity. Even when
I see dishes listed as being from these other regions, including
from outside of India entirely (Pakistani, Afghani etc.)
there is an amazing same-ness.

New Delhi Junction (on Telegraph) did just that before they closed,
moved north, and reopened as Ajanta. We always ordered off the
regional menu, never off the standard menu. The food was different
and very good.

Post by Steve Pope
Where do I find some of these "very different ideas"????

Udupi Palace in Newark is different. Lots of little bowls
of vegetables, some of them different from commonly found
Indian fare.

I ate an Udupi Palace (an apparently common name) in another city
(Sunnyvale). Various little bowls of vegetables, mostly steamed, and a
piece of bread.

OK, but not worth $12. Maybe $3, if the Vietnamese sandwich places
aren't open.

I doubt they pay $12 for this kind of steamed vegetarian stuff in India.

Meanwhile, Sneha and Banjara, not far away, offer a carnivore's
smorgasbrod of beef, chicken, and all the fried bread and vegetarian
stuff one could want. For much less money.

--Tim May

[Steve Pope]

Post by ll
New Delhi Junction (on Telegraph) did just that before they closed,
moved north, and reopened as Ajanta. We always ordered off the
regional menu, never off the standard menu. The food was different
and very good.

They were my favorite. Perhaps some of my loyalty to Ajanta
stems from that association -- I like Ajanta and think they're
very good, but NDH was all-around better.

There is nothing similar, presently.

Steve

[Steve Fenwick]

Post by Todd Michel McComb

Post by Max Hauser
It seems to be, Steve, that buffets are what "we" consumers demand.

Yes, it's really unfortunate. Turmerik started with really good
menu food, for instance, and then added a buffet. Then on our most
recent visit, almost seemed determined to "make" us eat the buffet
(for dinner, no less). I declined politely a couple of times, and
ultimately expressed my dismay with the whole situation. At that
point, they were apologetic and served us a nice meal. Since then,
it seems they've changed their format entirely. It's possible that
the new format continues to offer something good, but the entire
sequence seems unfortunate.
I don't have a problem with many restaurants offering a buffet, if
that's what people want, but since when does every restaurant have
to be the same? That's just dumb, but also buoyed by -- apparently
-- consumer images of an "Indian restaurant" as a very narrowly
defined entity. I'm sure this will change eventually.

I feel heartened that Gaylord is still in business, at least attempting
to stake out a claim in waited-table, higher-end Indian. Has anyone
tried them since they moved out of Stanford? I didn't see a recent
review through Deja.

But this points up the problem--Indian food may be perceived as "cheap",
so buffets and steam tables abound, with the rare sit-down, higher-end
restaurant occasionally found. There seems to be no middle ground
(mid-priced, paper napkin, waited table)--or perhaps there are, but they
are inconveniently located.

Why isn't this true of, say, Chinese (Mr. Chau's is close, but not the
same), Japanese, or other ethnicities?

Steve

[Alison Chaiken]

Post by Steve Fenwick
But this points up the problem--Indian food may be perceived as
"cheap", so buffets and steam tables abound, with the rare sit-down,
higher-end restaurant occasionally found. There seems to be no
middle ground (mid-priced, paper napkin, waited table)--or perhaps
there are, but they are inconveniently located.

Why don't Amber and Sue's meet these criteria? While most Indian
restaurants seem to have a buffet at lunch, many take orders from a
menu at dinner. There used to be an Indian place on Castro that had a
buffer for dinner, but that's the only one I've ever seen. I like a
buffet for a weekday lunch, when I tend to be in a hurry, but abhor it
for our rare dinners out, when I want to relax.

Post by Steve Fenwick
Why isn't this true of, say, Chinese (Mr. Chau's is close, but not
the same), Japanese, or other ethnicities?

Are you trying to say that there are more middle-ground Chinese and
Japanese places? (Unclear antecedent problem.)

[Steve Fenwick]

In article <***@capsicum.wsrcc.com>,
Alison Chaiken

Post by Alison Chaiken

Post by Steve Fenwick
But this points up the problem--Indian food may be perceived as
"cheap", so buffets and steam tables abound, with the rare sit-down,
higher-end restaurant occasionally found. There seems to be no
middle ground (mid-priced, paper napkin, waited table)--or perhaps
there are, but they are inconveniently located.

Why don't Amber and Sue's meet these criteria? While most Indian
restaurants seem to have a buffet at lunch, many take orders from a
menu at dinner. There used to be an Indian place on Castro that had a
buffer for dinner, but that's the only one I've ever seen. I like a
buffet for a weekday lunch, when I tend to be in a hurry, but abhor it
for our rare dinners out, when I want to relax.

I'd like a middle-of-the-road (say, $10 pp.) sit-down Indian at lunch.
Sue's might meet that, but it's the exception rather than the rule.

Post by Alison Chaiken

Post by Steve Fenwick
Why isn't this true of, say, Chinese (Mr. Chau's is close, but not
the same), Japanese, or other ethnicities?

Are you trying to say that there are more middle-ground Chinese and
Japanese places? (Unclear antecedent problem.)

Yes, at least in the neighborhoods I frequent (Castro; Cupertino;
Sunnyvale, near Murphy). In all of these areas, lunchtime non-fancy
Indian (i.e., somewhat cheaper than Gaylord) is predominantly buffet,
but lunchtime or dinner, Chinese and Japanese are usually sit-down
waited table service.

As with the expectations mentioned by others, it probably is a model
that serves the market enough to discourage other forms of competition
for the same lunch dollar.

Steve

[Max Hauser]

Why isn't this true of, say, Chinese, ...
Japanese, or other [ethnic restaurants]?
Steve

Not on the buffet issue, but assumptions do obsess some US Chinese
restaurants about what the gringos will "like." It's less common now than
20 years ago for an authentic Chinese restaurant to actively steer the
non-Chinese diner toward clichés (won ton soup, sweet-and-sour pork -- 40
years ago it was "chop suey," even in the Bay Area), but good ones still
often print only a sub-set of their dishes in English translation, and I've
heard people from these restaurants comment forthrightly about what gringos
"like" and "don't like."

The biting part is that, on the average, this is probably true, and good
business.

[Todd Michel McComb]

Post by Max Hauser
The biting part is that, on the average, this is probably true,
and good business.

I guess the kernel of truth is ultimately the most galling part.
It's common to have to reiterate and emphasize in order to get the
non-American dishes at Chinese restaurants. Honestly, I'm not sure
if it's really true that these tend to be preferred, or if it's
just that they have much higher profit margins (which I believe is
the case, at least).

[Al Eisner]

Post by Steve Fenwick
I feel heartened that Gaylord is still in business, at least attempting
to stake out a claim in waited-table, higher-end Indian. Has anyone
tried them since they moved out of Stanford? I didn't see a recent
review through Deja.

I tried them a couple of times, within the first couple of years after
they moved. But I found the food fairly uniformly overly salted. I don't
think they exhibited the care they once did, many years ago. It's been
at least three years since I've been there, however, so possibly they
have improved.

Post by Steve Fenwick
But this points up the problem--Indian food may be perceived as "cheap",
so buffets and steam tables abound, with the rare sit-down, higher-end
restaurant occasionally found. There seems to be no middle ground
(mid-priced, paper napkin, waited table)--or perhaps there are, but they
are inconveniently located.

Actually, I had trouble understanding your initial complaint. Most of
the Indian restaurants I go to have buffets only at lunch; at dinner,
ordering is from the menu. (Or, like Udupi Palace, they don't have a
buffet at all.) What places on the Peninsula have dinner buffets?
(I'd occasionally be interested in that.)

[Dave Eisen]

Post by Al Eisner
Actually, I had trouble understanding your initial complaint. Most of
the Indian restaurants I go to have buffets only at lunch; at dinner,
ordering is from the menu. (Or, like Udupi Palace, they don't have a
buffet at all.) What places on the Peninsula have dinner buffets?
(I'd occasionally be interested in that.)

Been a while since I've been to either of them, but Turmerik
and Passage to India both had dinner buffets. The no longer
existent Maharajah and Brahma Bull did as well.

[Steve Fenwick]

In article

Post by Al Eisner

Post by Steve Fenwick
I feel heartened that Gaylord is still in business, at least attempting
to stake out a claim in waited-table, higher-end Indian. Has anyone
tried them since they moved out of Stanford? I didn't see a recent
review through Deja.

I tried them a couple of times, within the first couple of years after
they moved. But I found the food fairly uniformly overly salted. I don't
think they exhibited the care they once did, many years ago. It's been
at least three years since I've been there, however, so possibly they
have improved.

Hmm, probably a personal taste issue. If herself liked Indian at all, I
might try her on it (she's a salt fiend).

Post by Al Eisner

Post by Steve Fenwick
But this points up the problem--Indian food may be perceived as "cheap",
so buffets and steam tables abound, with the rare sit-down, higher-end
restaurant occasionally found. There seems to be no middle ground
(mid-priced, paper napkin, waited table)--or perhaps there are, but they
are inconveniently located.

Actually, I had trouble understanding your initial complaint. Most of
the Indian restaurants I go to have buffets only at lunch; at dinner,
ordering is from the menu. (Or, like Udupi Palace, they don't have a
buffet at all.) What places on the Peninsula have dinner buffets?
(I'd occasionally be interested in that.)

Ah, that may be it, lunch versus dinner. I suspect also that (stupidly)
I see the buffets set up at dinner, and presume that that's that.

Steve

[Michael Good]

If you want something a bit different in sit-down Indian restaurants and
really good, try Marigold in Palo Alto., just a couple doors down from
Borders in downtown Palo Alto. They might have a buffet at lunch (I've never
been) but it's all to order at dinner. The owner is from Hyderabad and the
biryanis are killer. The achari dishes are the best we have found in the
area, and the tandoor is also way better than what we have found elsewhere.
The Apollo fish appetizer is another amazing dish that we haven't seen
elsewhere. It's not as distinct a menu as it could be, but it sure is
wonderful food. Thanks to whoever it was on ba.food who tipped me off to it
in the first place!

Michael

[Alison Chaiken]

Post by Michael Good
If you want something a bit different in sit-down Indian restaurants
and really good, try Marigold in Palo Alto., just a couple doors
down from Borders in downtown Palo Alto. They might have a buffet at
lunch (I've never been) but it's all to order at dinner.

Intriguing. Does Marigold have large tables, suitable for a party of
10? Anyone else have an idea about how crowded the place is at
lunchtime?

[Al Eisner]

Post by Alison Chaiken

Post by Michael Good
If you want something a bit different in sit-down Indian restaurants
and really good, try Marigold in Palo Alto., just a couple doors
down from Borders in downtown Palo Alto. They might have a buffet at
lunch (I've never been) but it's all to order at dinner.

Intriguing. Does Marigold have large tables, suitable for a party of
10? Anyone else have an idea about how crowded the place is at
lunchtime?

It's a small place, so I doubt if it would be easy for a party of 10.
I've been there once for lunch, and had the buffet, which I reviewd here

Post by Alison Chaiken
The $8 buffet consisted of
pretty standard items, but reasonably well prepared and (unlike some places)
kept hot. Probably the best items were a saag paneer and a sauteed cabbage.
And the bread was excellent. It's a small place, and water refills were
efficient. Nothing exceptional, but I might stop in again if I'm in the
area.

I don't recall a crowd, but it's quite possible I was having a late lunch.
Michael's review persuades me to try it for dinner some time.

[Steve Pope]

"Steve Fenwick" in

Post by Steve Fenwick
We could use a really good Indian place, not just another
buffet. Why is it that *all* Indian restaurants in this area
seem to centered around a buffet?

It seems to be, Steve, that buffets are what "we" consumers
demand. This subject was discussed earnestly here (a dozen years
ago) when Jeanne Bonk converted her lunch service at _Empress
of India_ on El Camino from a daily-special (no printed menu)
to a buffet. I believe that some people complained then too
(I believe one of them was me), but when asked, she explained
sympathetically that this was what the market expected.

I think a fraction of the market wants/expects a buffet,
and another fraction of the market would want a non-buffet
restaurant, but on the supply side it tilts towards the
former because buffets are easier. So the total market
remains underserved.

Two Indian places in Berkeley that do not do buffets at
lunch are Ajanta, and Vic's. They are also two of the best
around.

Steve

-- Max

[Eric Griswold]

Post by Steve Fenwick

Post by Eric Griswold
steel diner taking over Der Weinerschnizel corner. I'd give eyeteeth
for a place that'll serve up a good omelet n' coffee for breakfast.
[Charros works in its own way but an alternate would be great.]

Possibly not traditional, but definitely stainless steel, appears to be
going in kitty-corner to ex-Vivaca. I'm thinking Bandera crossed with
the Terminator.

I was under the (possibly wrong) impression that that would be
Miyake Mountain View's new home.

Anyone know better?

Eric