Pay in installments of $310.00 with
,
and
Shipping Estimate
USA
- USA
- CAN
- USA
- CAN
Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Sep 20 - Sep 25
Promo Codes Available:
For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15
Description
Midea 美的 MR-190E 181公升 極地白 雙門雪櫃Midea MR 190E 181 1810. 27 115 + 66 2C4C6C8C 36dB(A) MR 190E 181 115 66 0. 64 1. 5 kg 12h 36 dB(A) PCM 540 505 1485 mm 36 kg 220V 1 1
Midea 美的 MR-190E 181公升雙門雪櫃，採用極地白色設計，小體積大容量，適合各種居住環境使用。
產品特點
- 小體積大容量：181公升大容量，佔地僅0.27平米，空間利用率高，靈活擺放不受限
- 多層靈活儲鮮格局：冷藏室115公升 + 冷凍室66公升，雙溫區分區儲鮮滿足日常回購所需，美味就在身邊
- 電子精準控溫：可控溫自由調節，選擇守護每一味新鮮，2°C、4°C、6°C、8°C調溫，快冷、調溫六檔隨意選，新鮮隨身掌控
- 獨立蹬果抽屜：水果蹬水潤，保鮮時間長
- 開放式托盤：一目了然存易取，食材不遺忘
- 四星級冷凍：強勁冷凍能力，保鮮更長久
- 低噪音運行：僅36dB(A)，安靜不擾睡眠
產品規格
- 型號：MR-190E
- 顏色：極地白
- 總容積：181 公升
- 冷藏室容積：115 公升
- 冷凍室容積：66 公升
- 門款式：雙門式
- 制冷方式：直冷
- 控溫方式：電腦溫控
- 電機類型：定頻
- 能效等級：三級
- 耗電量：0.64 度/天
- 冷凍能力：1.5 kg/12h
- 冷凍星級：四星級
- 噪音值：36 dB(A)
- 開門方式：左開門
- 面板類型：PCM彩塗板
- 產品尺寸（長 × 寬 × 高）：540 × 505 × 1485 mm
- 產品淨重：36 kg
- 電源電壓：220V
主要功能
- 電子精準控溫
- 獨立蹬果抽屜
- 開放式托盤
- 四星級冷凍
- 低噪音運行
包裝清單
- 整機 × 1
- 說明書 × 1
Shipping Notes
- Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
- Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
- Delivery to the USA:
- Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
- If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
- We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
- Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
- To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
- Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
4.9 ★★★★★
Based on 6 reviews
Sort
Product Reviews
★★★★★ 4
A
This is a great resource. I thought I created great presentations before. Reading this made me realize the mistakes I was making and have me a process for really improving my decks
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on August 29, 2014
★★★★★ 5
So glad that I have bought these books from Amazon
Format: Paperback
Still working on getting through, I try and read more each day
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 5, 2025
★★★★★ 5
Must read
Format: Paperback
Impressive second book by Justin Driver.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on October 1, 2025
★★★★★ 5
Excellent!
Format: Paperback
Excellent read!
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on October 5, 2025
★★★★★ 1
A Disconnected and Legally Shaky Defense of Racial Preferences
Format: Paperback
While this book raises some thought-provoking points, it ultimately reads like a product of self-righteous elites disconnected from reality and from the American public.
1. Ignores public opinion.
The author never acknowledges that polls consistently show Americans oppose racial preferences in college admissions. Proposition 16—which would have allowed such preferences—was defeated by a wide margin in 2020 in California, one of the nation’s most liberal states. A Brookings poll found that virtually all racial groups, including Black respondents, supported the Supreme Court’s Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) decision.
2. Starts with a strange premise.
The first chapter claims conservatives will “regret” the SFFA ruling because universities will continue racial preferences covertly. But that sidesteps the real question: why shouldn’t colleges comply with the ruling’s letter and spirit?
3. Offers dubious legal advice.
In Chapter Three, the author—himself a law professor—floats risky ideas for “working around” the Supreme Court’s decision. Many of these suggestions rest on shaky legal ground, as anyone familiar with the Second Circuit’s CACAGNY v. Adams, 116 F.4th 161 (2d Cir. 2024), would recognize.
4. Ignores proportionality and real-world outcomes.
The book argues for “diversity” preferences without asking how much preference is justified. In reality, Asian American applicants face steep penalties. e.g. Stanley Zhong was rejected by five University of California campuses’ Computer Science programs as an in-state applicant—shortly before Google hired him for a full-time, Ph.D.-level software engineering position. Meanwhile, UC San Diego’s own freshman math-placement data show a surge of students—mostly “underrepresented minorities” favored by UC—placed into remedial courses, some testing at a 4th-grade level. It is hard to see how admitting these students is helping them other than allowing some elites to make themselves feel good or get a promotion.
If this book represents what passes for legal scholarship at Yale, the state of American legal education should worry us all.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on October 12, 2025