@fauguy - I live in NE Fort Lauderdale, zip code 33308. After testing the water from my kitchen tap with a Sofchek water hardness test strip I picked up at the shop where I purchased my Miele DW supplies (a vacuum shop at Commercial & 18th Ave.), I set my DW settings to 15 gpg. If I end up having a Miele tech out here at any point, I will ask them to recheck the water hardness. Our DW allows me to set the water hardness at the precise setting, as opposed to setting based on ranges. Unfortunately, I don't have much confidence in information obtained from my local water utility department; that's why I tested the water hardness myself. BTW, I spent time on the phone today with one of the founders of NY Minute, the company I booked based on your excellent recommendation. In my case, the installers left much to be desired. The lead installer spoke only broken English and communicating with him was a challenge. I put down layers of beach towels on the floor surrounding my dishwasher and the kitchen sink, yet the lead installer repeatedly ignored my requests to set his wrench, drill, etc. on the towels, and I repeatedly heard him dropping his tools onto the floor. As a result, I found multiple areas of damage (divets) in the marble flooring when they finished. Additionally, I just discovered that it appears I am missing two pieces of my dishwasher installation. Earlier today when I phoned Miele tech support to ask about how to tell when a cycle was complete, I learned that in addition to the audible setting (which had been disabled when our DW was installed) there should be a "prism" mounted to the underside of the granite counter, just above the Miele control panel on the DW, that serves to reflect the red indicator light that illuminates and flashes when a cycle has completed. According to the Miele tech, this prism is shipped in the box with the DW and comes with a corresponding stainless steel frame. Both pieces are to be attached by the installer. NY Minute's install team did not install, discuss, or leave me any such parts. Although my keyword search of the PDF manual does not indicate any matches for "prism," I discussed this with NYM today and also have a call in to the Miele Territory Manager who handles Miele issues for the dealer from whom we purchased our DW (FL Builder Appliances).

I agree with a lot of what DrB said, but not about the ovens. A "convection microwave" and a "speed oven" are two separate things, though some makers of speed ovens do it kind of badly so it's little better than a convection microwave. Regular ovens nowadays are very problematic things. That's cooking/baking/roasting/broiling cavities--not ranges including burners (but including the ovens in the ranges). Too much of the engineering goes into energy saving, cost saving, and inventory control, and too little goes into performance. The oven is the kitchen appliance with the strongest correlation between amount spent and quality of performance. It's also the one that's most likely to have problems with performance. There are some notable high end fails, but even for the previous Wolf that had troubles with chipping of the interior, causing shards to be blown into the food--which was a critical fail--the performance of the cooking works of the oven, when not chipped, was exemplary. The chipping issue seems to be fixed with the new model, and it's the last thing I'd consider downgrading. Microwaves, OTOH, are another story. Built-in 240V MWs have a performance edge on the countertop 110V units, but if, like most of us, the MW is mostly used for heating a bowl of cereal, a sandwich or a cup of coffee, melting butter, making popcorn, or defrosting soup, a $100 countertop unit will suffice for most people. All microwaves are made by about three makers, most notably Sharp and Panasonic. The special features (sensors, programed buttons, etc.) and looks may differ according the requirements of the company whose badge is on it, but the works are all the same. Microwaves never seem to get complaints. They work as expected and are generally all of the same high quality.

I went with MIele because you control the % of steam that you add and can easily set up multiple cooking steps with different % steam amounts.. Wolf only has cooking modes to choose from and you don’t know how much steam is being injected into the cavity and exactly what that mode is actually doing. I bake a lot of bread and particularly lean breads. I want to be able to add steam for X minutes early in the baking cycles and Miele allows me to have control over that. The plumbed version did not come out until after we had plumbed our slab and adding a drain for the plumbed version was too expensive for me. I also have a prep sink two steps away so dealing with the containers for me is not an issue. I would do a plumbed version if I was starting from scratch again. I would also go for the XXL model. I would go for a 10 year warranty. The Steam ovens have lots of moving parts so IMHO more likely to need repair and they are $$$ to fix. I was going with Benchmark induction but did not like the fact that the side elements default to bridge and you have to unbridge them to use them as separate elements. That was not intuitive to me and I wanted my friends and family to be comfortable cooking on my induction cooktop without a learning curve. I also did not like having to select a hob and then the level. If I need a quick turn down it is two steps. The Wolf is direct select one step - burner and level. I can also put one or more very small pans if needed on my large element to keep warm - Bosch’s large element did not recognize my smallest 4.5” pan. Bosch has more heat levels but Wolf calibrated theirs to be exponential so the lower levels are closer together than the higher levels. When would you use a 13 versus 14 or 15 or a 16 versus a 17? The 10 levels are more than sufficient In my 3+ years experience. Wolf’s bridging is great - you can bridge two left to right or front to back or all 4 at once. I have used every configuration. I can’t speak to your wok cooking. I stir fry on my wolf and find it completely adequate but I am not a wok expert by any means. Perhaps others can chime in here.

Wow, what a bunch of mis-information in a single comment. I normally would leave it at this, but I don't want people to search the archives and get confused. A plasma TV's temperature is not an indication of lower energy efficiency. Temperature isn't an indicator of energy efficiency, but heat output very much. Any energy consumed by the device has to be released somehow, either as mechanical energy (not applicable for a device that doesn't have a motor), as light energy (a smaller percentage, even for a TV), or as heat (the bulk of the energy). As this is hard to quantify, I looked at watts/h instead. That's the definition of energy efficiency. And with the exception of really small screen sizes, plasma TVs are consistently a lot more wasteful than any modern technology. [ Lots of hand-wavy vague discussions how TVs are complicated. ] If anything, the reverse is probably true. Older TVs had tons and tons of discreet parts, whereas modern TVs are highly integrated and frequently only have a very small number of highly integrated components. This has been a general trend and explains why TVs can be built so much cheaper today. Just to put this into perspective, if you look at the size of a settop box from only about 15-20 years ago, it was the size of a small shoe box, and it probably cost on the order of $100. Today, the equivalent device is the size of a USB stick and costs on the order of $20 -- and it probably does a lot more, too. You'd observe the same thing, if you opened up a modern TV. Very little electronics that are left in there. I have a hard time finding a tear-down of a modern TV, as it simply is so boring that nobody wants to document it. But here is one for a 4 year old model: https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Changhong+UD42YC5500UA+4K+42-Inch+LED+LCD+TV+Teardown/64167 Notice how little there is to making a TV. [ Statements equating weight with quality. ] The bulk of the weight of a plasma TV came from the insanely heavy front glass panel that is needed to build all the plasma cells. That simply isn't necessary with LCD or OLED technology and explains both the smaller depth and the much reduced weight. And while weight isn't really an indicator of quality, being lightweight is a real advantage for many consumers. A modern TV can easily be hung on the wall, but a plasma TV is almost impossible to mount that way. That also partially explains why larger format plasma TVs never took off in the market. Nobody would be able to carry a 90" plasma TV without hiring professional movers. [ Then OLED and QLED came along and completely solved that problem by using multiple different layers of TV panels within a single TV panel. ] What a bunch of crock! There is no such thing as multiple layers of panels. A plasma TV had an array of pixels that had alternating colors of phospors in front of each adjacent plasma cell. A LCD (that includes QLED) panel has a white backlight and alternating color filters in front of each adjacent LCD pixel. An OLED display has alternating colors of adjacent organic LEDs. Do you notice a pattern? Exactly! It's all a similar design of differently colored pixels right next to each other. But some of these pixels are more efficient than others. OLED are by far the best approach, but they are costly to manufacture. LCD is cheap to manufacture at scale, is lightweight and very thin, and color quality is close enough when using a good backlight and good color filters. This is where QLED comes into the picture. The idea of FullHD is an illusion. The human eye cannot process the colors that "FullHD" purports to put out onto a TV screen. I really hope that was a typo. FullHD has absolutely nothing to do with colors. But yes, there are difference in color gamut and in dynamic range. Historically, that was one of the areas where plasma had a distinct advantage. It used to have a much better dynamic range than LCD technology, only OLED was equivalent (or better). But OLED didn't really exist as a viable consumer product at that time. Color gamut is the big elephant in the room though. Traditional standard definition TV has a really narrow color range, and that's really noticeable when compared to film. These days, you can get a similar visual experience, if your TV is HDR capable, and if the source material includes the necessary information. In general, this is only available for 4k-enabled systems. So, independent of resolution, 4k does bring important picture improvements. And even if you no longer have 20/20 vision, most people will easily be able to tell the difference between standard and high dynamic range. All of a sudden, details in dark scenes are possible to be made out without washing out bright spots in the same scene. A good starting point to learn more about high dynamic range and color gamut is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-dynamic-range_video Make sure to click on the links though. There is a lot more information hidden on Wikipedia that is relevant to this topic. The human eye can only process at most, 480p It should be self-evident that this statement is obviously incorrect. The human eye doesn't have a fixed resolution in pixels. It does have a limit though as to what the smallest detail is that it can discern. This means, the closer you sit to the screen the more pixel you can discern. But nobody sits a foot away from their screen. In fact, because of our limited field of vision, there are guidelines how far away you should sit given a particular screen size. In practice, many people sit back a little more than the optimal distance. The average distance from the screen in the US is about 9 feet. For people with normal 20/20 vision and with a normal ~50" screen, that means that can easily distinguish between 480 scan lines, 720 scan lines, and even 1080 scan lines. But most of us wouldn't be able to tell the difference of 2160 scan lines in a 4k image. But don't take my word for it. Have a look at this very informative Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimum_HDTV_viewing_distance