What's the age old taco dilemma? I'm not referring to how many you can eat before your intestines erupt in flames. Soft shell or hard shell. Why is it even a question? Why do we have both? Well, everyone really prefers the taste of the hard shell, but the mess can become quite a distraction. There will be crumbs and fragments shed everywhere, the ingredients and juices dribble out, often over your fingers and on the table, and it just creates an all around destructive mess.
This is where the soft shell comes in, better known often just as a burrito. No fuss, no muss. You can even take these with you on the road, eat them one-handed, or hurl them at passing motorists. (See Anchorman) What's more, the burrito contains a well-mixed blending of ingredients. Everything is neatly stirred together, and they can be consumed without too much danger of taking one bite that's entirely rice, the next bite a mouthful of salsa, and then washing that down with the actual protein.
These are ideals the hard shell taco can only dream about. For now. What's truly needed is some type of hard shell burrito. Perhaps open on one end, for the ingredients (already mixed) to be funneled into. That way, people can enjoy the crunchy texture all throughout the burrito. As a last resort, if this new-age thick, hard shell burrito seems to fail logistially, at least Taco Bell could have the decency to sprinkle in Tostito (or Dorito!) bits throughout a soft shell burrito, so the crunch is not completely lacking.
What are the top 7 functions of a fast food restaurant?