[HN Gopher] BMW removing touchscreen from a bunch of models due ...
___________________________________________________________________
BMW removing touchscreen from a bunch of models due to chip
shortage
Author : edward
Score : 157 points
Date : 2021-11-28 19:19 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.autoblog.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.autoblog.com)
| erenw wrote:
| Bought my bmw x3 m40i 2020 last year, and I honestly have not
| touchscreen once. I have always been using the swivel wheel..
| GDC7 wrote:
| Central wheel control FTW.
|
| BMW pioneered it in 2006
| jen20 wrote:
| Even earlier, I believe. I test drove a 7 series from 2003 that
| had the wheel (in the UK).
| BoorishBears wrote:
| I love the scrolling steering wheel control, it's wonderfully
| tactile and easy to operate while you're driving. That combined
| with the HUD makes going to other cars painful when it comes to
| basic input stuff
| cronix wrote:
| Whatever touchscreen you provide, my phone will be better,
| smoother, have a more polished UI and easily upgradable to stay
| current. Navigation apps are infinitely better than what you get
| stuck with, and I can navigate by voice using state of the art
| tech that keeps getting better with updates. Just give me a
| decent phone holder (upgradable) and bluetooth, and make that
| bluetooth a module that can be swapped out as newer bluetooth
| versions become available like swapping out an old ISA card on a
| PC. Same with usb. You buy a 10 year old car and get stuck with
| ancient USB ports with very low charging rates that don't really
| interface with modern equipment. All this "modern" crap dates the
| car before the actual utility of the car (a thing to get you
| places) does.
|
| I am thankful for the physical audio volume knob on the
| dashboard. I literally don't even use the touchscreen (except to
| change the clock 2x a year), as I have a lovely 12" tablet that
| does everything I want with a large beautiful display that is
| easy to read, blocking it. That's on a 2019 model.
| maxdo wrote:
| Whatever you refer is a bad implementation of your car. They
| not able to supply you with decent update system and maps. I
| never use a phone in my car, and that's the best thing I
| experience in the car since 3g start working good during trip.
| You have good big screen for navigation, you don't need this
| ugly phone mounts in the car, it doesn't fall-off during turns,
| you don't need stupid wires. That's a right way to implement
| it. When car manufacture put a big decent screen with good
| brightness and willing to pay tiny fraction of the car price to
| maps API provider. If BMW is not willing to do that in 2021
| they are bad manufacture that it.
| Schroedingersat wrote:
| Even better would be just leave out the entire entertainment
| unit (except maybe an amplifier and speakers, and have a
| standardized rectangular hole with mounting brackets.
|
| Even better if you put all the physical buttons for accessories
| (heat, amplifier volume etc) on a panel fitted into an
| identical hole.
|
| Replace the pointlessly curved dash with nowhere to mount
| anything with a standard shape that can be removed with bolts
| (and without removing all the trim) while you're at it.
| Animats wrote:
| That was once the case, and led to a whole ecosystem of car
| stereo stores. The auto companies wanted to capture that
| revenue, so now that's all built in.
| dehrmann wrote:
| How well do the Apple and Android car/auto integrations work?
| Do they push enough of the smarts into the phone that you can
| mostly avoid bad automaker interfaces?
| nthj wrote:
| I have a 2021 Honda. Yes, CarPlay is basically the iOS
| philosophy of "full screen touch interface with Siri that
| becomes wholly focused on whichever app you're using." Maps,
| Spotify, and Messages are the 3 I mainly use, but I could
| download more from the App store or even make my own.
| bootlooped wrote:
| The last car I owned had Android Auto. I like it a lot and
| would plug my phone in to get it pretty much every drive.
| krrrh wrote:
| A few years back I got a ~$300 head unit that supports
| CarPlay to replace the CD/tapedeck in my 2004 truck and it is
| still streets ahead of any modern first party offerings I've
| seen. If automakers had the sense to leave climate controls
| as physical buttons and dials and just provided a dumb screen
| that booted to "connect your smartphone for media and
| nav...", we'd all be better off.
| aasasd wrote:
| You forget to explain why one would do any of that instead of
| selling you a newer car.
| ec109685 wrote:
| Always use a cigarette adapter for faster charging.
|
| There isn't anything inherently preventing touch screens from
| being upgradable (software is already possible today).
| pkulak wrote:
| I was on that train for a long time, but I've swung all the way
| around to the other side now. I want my nav available without
| me having to take my phone out of my pocket and hook it up
| (even if it's wireless, which comes with its own issues). Like,
| I want to sit in the seat, then scroll through recent
| destinations with a button on the steering wheel and be done.
|
| Also, and this is huge, I want the turns in the HUD. Before you
| have one, a HUD is a dumb gimmick. I got one on my current car
| just because that's what was on the lot... and boy oh boy, I'm
| not going back to looking next to my knee before every turn.
| Not gonna lie, I'm an average driver at best. I need to be
| focused on the road at all times. Glancing away is all the time
| the car in front needs to slam on its brakes.
|
| The trade off is not the absolute, most accurate turn by turn
| directions; not taking the best and latest traffic into account
| at all times. But I've also found that I'm not cool with
| weaving through neighborhoods to save 3 minutes. Putting on a
| good podcast and sitting on the freeway is okay with me.
| Der_Einzige wrote:
| HUDs are not a dumb gimmick even if you don't have turn-by-
| turn directions.
|
| Turn-by-turn in the HUD is awesome and really helps - but
| don't tell me that it's not a little bit dangerous to try to
| check your speed while you're driving without a HUD!
|
| The ideal solution is a HUD that communicates with
| carplay/android auto. Once that is here I will feel like the
| future has finally arrived.
| [deleted]
| drdaeman wrote:
| > then scroll through recent destinations with a button on
| the steering wheel and be done
|
| This, but with a voice control option, please, so I don't
| even have to distract myself looking at the options.
|
| > I want the turns in the HUD
|
| And IMHO - ideally - on a real HUD, the one projected over
| the windshield. I drove a Volvo that had it, it was nowhere
| perfect (especially in sunlight) but if the conditions were
| right it made a whole world of difference compared to the
| under-windshield or worse (behind-the-wheel) displays.
|
| Not to mention that real HUDs are typically quite limited and
| thus not crowded with useless graphical bells and whistles.
|
| I really loathe car dashboard designs. It's either something
| straight out of 60s, huge round dials without any thought put
| behind their meaning - like the engine rpm being the largest
| one, on a car with automatic transmission; or "modern"
| designs with lot of colorful icons and those animated
| blinking moving parts showing how engine braking recharges
| the battery right this moment.
|
| An HUD like this https://www.volvocars.com/images/support/img
| a73646cb4d8984f3... (sadly, cannot find a real photo, but it
| looks quite similar in real life) is almost perfect.
| pkulak wrote:
| Haha, that's exactly mine. The car I'm talking about is a
| late-model Volvo.
| samwillis wrote:
| Ignoring the touchscreen debate. I picked up a new Audi in
| September, they asked if they could just give me a single key for
| now. i was given the actual stick part of the second key but not
| the fob. Obviously shortage in chips for the fobs. I'm sure if I
| protested they would have found another somewhere (or if I was
| picking up a top model) but I was happy to help. Will probably
| get the second fob next year sometime.
|
| They also told me they had to make a call to a customer that
| afternoon who had orders an A3 to a custom spec back in March
| 2021 to update her on the new delivery date... for March 2022.
| And that's just an A3!
| AlexanderDhoore wrote:
| Touchscreen in a BMW is already optional to use. You have the
| control joystick, which you use when driving. Touchscreen is for
| the passenger next to the driver, or when standing still. I
| personally never use it and prefer the joystick for all
| interactions. Touch is just useless when the car is moving, my
| eyes are on the road and my hand can't find the buttons.
|
| EDIT Talking about this thing:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKmxrvDupCI
| GhostVII wrote:
| I hate touch screens in cars, but this isn't a win for fans of
| physical controls, despite what a bunch of other commenters seem
| to think - they aren't adding any new physical buttons, just
| disabling the touch screen and only allowing you to use the dial.
| BoorishBears wrote:
| BMW has always had the dial as the primary input on iDrive, the
| touchscreen is an afterthought.
|
| Even _before_ the supply chain shock there were models that had
| near identical iDrive interfaces with a mix of touchscreen /no-
| touchscreen based on model year and LCI updates
| marmshallow wrote:
| This comment should be higher. The ui may be even more
| difficult/dangerous to use if you need to use the dial instead
| of tapping.
|
| Like another commenter said, very curious to see safety studies
| on car uis.
| monkeydust wrote:
| I feel BMW missed an opportunity here to market this as an
| advantage rather than disadvantage...play on 'we listened to
| customer feedback'...and the safety angle.
|
| I think that would have played better for their sales, at least
| that's my hunch.
| janitor61 wrote:
| The problem I have with touch screens in cars is lining up your
| finger so that it presses the right area of the screen, which is
| difficult when driving (and dangerous). Why can't they integrate
| some sort of capacitive proximity sensor matrix in the LCD that
| will display a crosshair cursor as your finger gets near the
| screen? This would help immensely with lining up the press and
| allow me to use the thing quickly like analog controls.
| poulsbohemian wrote:
| I recently drove a friend's Mercedes and the hard part wasn't the
| touchscreen but rather the input device. On the center console
| there were some physical buttons and levers, and on the steering
| wheel column there were multiple dials. The problem was that what
| I thought should have been the gear shifter was instead
| conceptually a "mouse" for navigating the on screen menu options.
| Thankfully I only needed to drive the car a few miles, as one
| friend had already given up on driving the car and asked me to
| take the wheel instead - she was that frustrated by the controls!
|
| Could be that I'd get used to it, but it wasn't a good first
| experience.
| jagger27 wrote:
| Mazda has been doing the reasonable thing in this area for a
| while*. Recent models don't have touch screens and require you to
| use the (funnily enough, BMW i-Drive style) control knob for
| radio and CarPlay. Even their most recent model, the CX-50, has a
| full array of manual knobs and controls.[1]
|
| * With the sad exception of their first EV, the MX-30, which puts
| climate controls on a touch screen[2]. The upper display is still
| controlled by the knob, though. Weird choice.
|
| 1: https://smartcdn.prod.postmedia.digital/driving/wp-
| content/u...
|
| 2:
| https://www.netcarshow.com/mazda/2021-mx-30/1600x1200/wallpa...
| flatiron wrote:
| I have a 2015 Ford Explorer with CarPlay. Does CarPlay just stink
| or is it fords bad implementation? Siri only works sometimes. The
| radio.com (or audacy or whatever it's named now) only works 20%
| of the time. Waze constantly has rendering problems. It's a giant
| mess. But much better than sync3 which honestly may be worse than
| nothing.
| krrrh wrote:
| That sounds like a Ford implementation. My cheap aftermarket
| CarPlay deck works pretty much flawlessly in a 2004 Explorer.
| wly_cdgr wrote:
| tfw supply shortages force design improvements
| dawnerd wrote:
| But it isn't an improvement since nothing else changes. They're
| just charging the same (or higher let's be real after dealer
| markups) for fewer features.
| wly_cdgr wrote:
| "fewer features" is often an improvement by itself, tho - i
| think that's the case here
| YetAnotherNick wrote:
| I thought replacing touchscreen chips were easier as they likely
| ran some mobile ARM chip for which there seems to be no shortage.
| My understanding was replacing other chips were harder as they
| are specialised for serving one purpose and needs safety and
| other considerations.
| mud_dauber wrote:
| My Silverado touchscreen has been problematic for a year now.
| Nothing like getting a voice command to "state your content type"
| while navigating rush hour traffic.
| ubermonkey wrote:
| I have hated every touchscreen I've seen in every car, including
| and especially the Tesla, with the sole exception of touch-
| enabled implementations of CarPlay.
|
| It just seems like a bad idea. I have, for my whole driving life
| (so 35 years) often adjusted car settings by feel, without
| looking away from the road. Touch screens ruin that.
| buserror wrote:
| A LOT of features have disappeared on BMWs in the last few
| months. I looked into trading in my X5 (2019) for a X5 45e (plug
| in hybrid) but it was missing quite a few bits that came as
| standard before. Like, fog lights. Or the heated/cooled cup
| holders, wifi hotspot and several other features.
|
| Strangely (ahem) the prices haven't gone down!
| cronix wrote:
| That sounds more due to inflation. Instead of charging you
| more, they keep the price the same and give you less stuff.
| It's not unique to cars. Even food packages are getting smaller
| in weight of product and the price the same, or more. I've
| heard it described as "shrinkflation." For instance, a "pint"
| of Hagen Dazs ice cream has changed from 16oz (a pint) to 14oz
| in the last few months.
|
| > Many consumers may have noticed that popular food and
| beverage containers are shrinking along with their wallets, but
| that prices, alas, are not. Tropicana, for example, recently
| redesigned its large orange juice container, giving it an easy-
| pour lid--and the capacity to hold only 89 ounces, rather than
| its old 96 ounces. The price has stayed constant. In an email,
| Tropicana spokeswoman, Karen May, explained that the smaller
| size was needed as "the optimum configuration" for the new lid,
| adding, "Our consumer research indicates that, despite the
| smaller size, there was no change in the perceived value of the
| product because of the benefits of the added features."
|
| https://www.newsweek.com/food-packaging-shrinks-prices-stay-...
| JaimeThompson wrote:
| Are turn signals still an optional extra? :)
| buserror wrote:
| Yes, the stalk is there, buf if you use it, black cars come
| to your house, remove your BMW and replace it with a
| Wolkswagen! Us BMW drivers are all terrified of using them!
| Hamuko wrote:
| Front fog lights are utterly useless anyways. Many cars don't
| even come with them now.
| buserror wrote:
| Actually I use them a lot, on single track roads in the UK,
| they provide a MUCH better coverage around the front/side of
| the car -- I don't know how many critter I managed to dodge
| because I saw their eyes in the hedges.
| Hamuko wrote:
| Is it actually that foggy there that regularly?
| bestnameever wrote:
| That depends, what do you define as regularly?
| wizzwizz4 wrote:
| In parts of the country, definitely. For days on end,
| sometimes.
|
| And it doesn't really matter how regularly. If you are
| driving in those conditions... you only have to crash
| once.
| Hamuko wrote:
| But fog lights don't really prevent you from crashing.
| They do not output that much light and unlike your
| headlights and highbeams, they are not directed, but just
| scatter light in front of you.
|
| In the UK, it's not legal to have the fog lights on
| unless your visibility is less than 100 metres in front
| of you. That's basically the same range as your dipped
| lights have, and less than five seconds worth of
| visbility if you're doing 80 km/h.
|
| If your visibility is reduced so much, your best bet
| against crashing isn't just to scatter some light near
| the bottom of your front bumper, but to engage the rear
| fog lights and drop your speed significantly.
| Silhouette wrote:
| Often enough that I probably use high visibility lights
| on several journeys per year on average. It's usually
| because of dense fog on rural roads but occasionally
| conditions like torrential rain on a motorway too.
|
| On rare occasions I've had to drive in conditions so bad
| that the front fogs on my car were providing the main or
| perhaps only useful illumination of the road immediately
| ahead. We were all just crawling along at barely more
| than walking pace, even on roads that might normally have
| been major high-speed routes. Vehicles without
| appropriate lights were parking up, totally unable to
| make progress until the weather improved. That definitely
| hasn't been an annual occurrence in my experience, but
| it's happened to me more than once.
|
| I'd be very wary of buying any new car without excellent
| lights today. I'd even say the lighting would be in my
| top 5 deciding factors. Basic headlights have improved
| dramatically in recent years, thanks to better light
| sources and adaptive technologies that offer better
| coverage without dazzling other road users, but the
| specialised lights like high visibility and reversing
| lights are also important at the those times when you do
| need them.
| k8sToGo wrote:
| The front fog lights also often act as the light that goes on
| when turning into a street (rather than a curve). So not
| useless.
| Hamuko wrote:
| Most cars have dedicated curve lights instead now.
| [deleted]
| k8sToGo wrote:
| Curve light is not the same.
| Daniel_sk wrote:
| I had the newest X3 with iDrive and I think I never actually
| touched the display itself - the "wheel" was perfect, much faster
| and safer. There was literally no need to touch the screen.
| _zoltan_ wrote:
| exactly. I think most of the people bashing here are missing
| this point. I always use the wheel in my BMW.
| eddieroger wrote:
| I have a 2017 Honda Civic, which was one of the few models with a
| touch-based volume control (as opposed to the physical knob). It
| is a pain to adjust the volume, since it is hard to know if I'm
| tapping and what direction it interprets the tab, or sliding, and
| if the velocity of the slide matters for how much the volume
| changes. It's nice to be able to touch on the CarPlay interface,
| but I would trade it for a predictable knob, and I think Honda
| knows this is a good move since they added the physical knob back
| the following model year. I guess that's just another vote for
| physical controls in the car.
| fnord77 wrote:
| gotta say, touch screens suck while driving over bumpy roads. BMW
| idrive is a pretty decent interface, better than almost all the
| other dial-based ones
| mh- wrote:
| I really expected to hate the dial-based interface in my (non-
| touch) BMW but I actually grew to quite like it.
| formerly_proven wrote:
| Putting a touchpad on top of the dial for OCR is kinda
| ingenius and works rather nicely.
| jen20 wrote:
| Wait, that does OCR?! I only realized the other day that
| you can pinch to zoom on it...
| carom wrote:
| I would happily trade in the touch screen on my Jeep for some
| nice physical controls. It displays a safety dialog every time
| the car starts and controls (volume!) are disabled while that
| dialog is up. Similarly, it switches inputs constantly, so the
| radio plays if my phone is not connected. Just give me a knob to
| select input because I always want it on Bluetooth.
| itronitron wrote:
| I rented a car recently with a touch screen that would display
| that safety dialog and also not allow a destination to be
| entered into the sat nav without first placing the vehicle in
| park. Considering that this model of vehicle is often marketed
| to families it seems odd that they wouldn't consider the
| possibility that a passenger could enter the destination
| without distracting the driver. If touchscreens are that big of
| a liability (and I believe that they are since the touchscreen
| doesn't provide any tactile affordance for the driver to
| distinguish controls) then they shouldn't be in the car in the
| first place.
| rsync wrote:
| "... not allow a destination to be entered into the sat nav
| without first placing the vehicle in park ..."
|
| I am under the impression that this limitation is tied to the
| occupancy sensor in the passenger seat (which you undoubtedly
| have, or the seat-belt chime would sound incessantly ...).
|
| I believe if you had a passenger those controls would be
| allowed while driving - did you have a chance to test that ?
| bayindirh wrote:
| I think, car manufacturers are installing them to reduce
| manufacturing costs in the long run, because instead of
| building plastic parts, you install a module and get
| infinitely more ways to exploit the customers in various ways
| you see fit.
|
| Also, it looks good on paper, and allows some useful controls
| while is backwards in many ways.
|
| I'd rather have physical buttons which I can operate blindly
| rather than a touchscreen though. They're really dangerous
| when it replaces the physical buttons.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| Pushing the puck/ok button didn't dismiss it?
| bluGill wrote:
| Yeah, the touchscreen is great for the navigator. It needs to
| be placed where the driver cannot even see it: the driver
| shouldn't even be able to help the navigator as just looking
| at the screen takes the drivers off the road for too long..
|
| If you are driving solo I'm fine with a while in park mode
| that you can see a touch screen, but I can't think of a good
| way to implement it.
| drdaeman wrote:
| Head-Up Displays solve this by projecting the essential
| information on the windshield. So you don't have to move
| your eyes away from the road at all - and even when you're
| looking at the HUD data, you still have a view of the road,
| unlike those displays on the central column where the best
| you have is some peripheral vision.
|
| Paired with a voice assistant, it could work nicely for the
| navigation. You say "navigate to $address", and HUD would
| show you the essential information for your next turn
| (rough distance, street or exit name, turn lanes).
| climb_stealth wrote:
| Not sure if they still do, but the infotainment in Mazdas used
| to do that. I very quickly learned to turn down the volume
| before turning off the car. I still do it in every other car
| because it has traumatised me so much.
|
| For some reason Blueooth was a lot more quiet than the other
| input sources. So you play music from the phone whilst driving
| and turn up the volume. All good there. But then when you start
| the car again and it couldn't connect to the phone for any
| reason it would decide to switch back to radio with the jacked
| up volume and blast it in your face. It's a full on jump scare.
|
| That aside their infotainment controls are actually really
| good. Better than many other cars including much more expensive
| ones. It was quite satisfying to build up muscle memory on the
| infotainment menus with the excellent knob controls and not
| having to look at it.
| foodstances wrote:
| Does your Mazda not have the physical volume knob in the
| center console near the cupholder? The touchscreen and
| steering wheel controls are useless until ~30 seconds after
| starting the car, but the physical volume knob always works
| (at in the CX-5).
| ehPReth wrote:
| My vehicle (different make/year) does the radio thing too..
| even sometimes if the bluetooth isn't playing anything. Super
| annoying. I found a somewhat reliable workaround though; I
| switch to XM radio which I'm not subscribed to and then to BT
| when that happens.. then when then it falls back it tries to
| play the locked XM channel (or channel 0 which just shows radio
| ID)
| Nav_Panel wrote:
| Yeah a friend of mine recently rented a car and it was so
| frustrating just to configure audio playback. Android Auto kept
| popping up on my phone, and I had to manually switch the car to
| bluetooth every time, which meant menu diving and then asking
| my friend to pull over so I could pair my phone/adjust the
| audio settings. Really stupid all around.
|
| On the other hand, my car (a 2006 Hyundai Sonata) has a CD
| drive and a radio, with a knob for volume and a knob for
| tuning, and that's it. I keep a stack of CDs in the car plus a
| little bluetooth-to-FM dongle which I rarely ever use, because
| I usually either enjoy my CDs or want to hear what's on the
| radio!
|
| Only feature I'd really want from a fancy HUD is rear camera,
| as I do a lot of parallel parking in Brooklyn, but idk, I've
| gotten pretty good at doing it without "assistance".
| frereubu wrote:
| I haven't had a touchscreen in a car, and while I'm excited with
| the idea of having a fully electric car, I have to say that the
| thing I dread the most is touchscreens. Are touchscreens in cars
| mostly things like music and satnav, or are they also used for
| things like A/C, direction of air flow etc?
| ISL wrote:
| We recently got a loaner car from our local Subaru -- lots of
| controls were touchscreen only, including climate and radio
| controls.
|
| Needing to take your eyes off the road to interact with safety-
| critical controls (defroster, for example) is a step backward.
| Silhouette wrote:
| _Needing to take your eyes off the road to interact with
| safety-critical controls (defroster, for example) is a step
| backward._
|
| ...and there 's a 100m cliff behind you with some innocent
| families playing at the bottom.
|
| It staggers me that regulators around the world didn't block
| the trend for highly interactive UIs and touchscreen controls
| for essential driving actions a long time ago. It's so
| obviously dangerous and unashamedly putting style before
| substance.
|
| It terrifies me that before long I'm going to have to give up
| my existing car in favour of something modern. I would be
| very happy to have the better performance and environmental
| characteristics of modern cars but I have yet to find one
| where the technology didn't actively deter me from buying.
| poulsbohemian wrote:
| I'm curious what model, as I have a new Subaru Ascent and
| have been very pleased with the mix of touchscreen and
| physical knobs - and I'm a guy who was super skeptical about
| the touchscreen.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| It varies by trim level. For example the entry level
| outback has physical climate controls, but the "premium"
| one has tiny little buttons on the touch screen
| ISL wrote:
| A recent-model Outback, probably a 2021?
|
| This is what it looked like:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akCh_LyGOt0 There are more
| knobs than I remembered, but the overwhelming sense was
| that the touchscreen made difficult things possible, but
| the simplest things more-difficult.
|
| Many of the climate settings are in software. The seat-
| heaters as a software switch are a big step backward from
| the 2013 Outback's dedicated buttons, too.
| poulsbohemian wrote:
| Oh! Thanks for the video - wow, that is significantly
| different from the Ascent! On mine the heating / cooling
| options are all physical controls as are the buttons for
| switching between media modes. Yes once you are into
| things like CarPlay it's all touch screen, but even then
| there are control buttons from the steering wheel for
| next track / previous track, volume, invoke siri, etc.
| mh- wrote:
| Varies by car, of course.
|
| I think Tesla is the most extreme towards the all-touch end of
| the spectrum. I recall reading their windshield wiper controls
| are only on the touch screen.
|
| My GM vehicle has physical knobs and buttons for almost
| everything, but some of the functions are also available in the
| touch screen. Climate control, as an example.
| hettygreen wrote:
| I knew this thread would be filled will people that dislike
| touchscreens. I hate them too and and when we bought our first
| car, we looked at a used Subaru at the last model-year that kept
| physical controls. I'm a synthesizer designer, so I'm a bit
| biased towards knobs.
|
| My dad just bought a new Toyota Civic and I've watched him be
| completely frustrated and overwhelmed by the touch screen. I've
| also had to use it a few times while driving it and noticed that
| my eyes needed to be off the road for way longer than I'm
| comfortable with (just to turn the volume down!).
|
| Is there ever going to be a movement towards these car companies
| going back to physical controls for this stuff? Or are we pretty
| much heading towards a steeringwheel-less wrap around touchscreen
| dashboard that plays advertisements for nearby businesses.
|
| I'm legitimately curious about the safety of these things, and
| has any studies been done? It's just strange to have car
| companies investing billions in self-driving cars claiming
| "you're too distracted to operate a car yourself" and then making
| current models where adjusting the A/C requires drilling down
| thru menus.
| 0xy wrote:
| HN leans contrarian and older. Car buyers below 31 prefer touch
| screens. [1]
|
| [1] https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/best-cars-
| blog/2012/01/y...
| wruza wrote:
| _Generation Y buyers are also interested in cars packed with
| technology, including smartphone integration and touch-screen
| interfaces, according to the Los Angeles Times. With systems
| like MyFord Touch and the Tesla Model S' iPad-like touch-
| screen center stack, automakers have already started to
| address this in the market, but most reviewers say there's
| lots of room for improvement. In particular, Ford's MyFord
| Touch system has been panned for its labyrinthine setup,
| hard-to-use controls and buggy software._
|
| Let me translate it from journal-ish. They said they'd like
| fuel data and music in their _smartphones_ because in-car
| touchscreen ui is utter bullshit.
| kelnos wrote:
| Prefer, perhaps, but do they increase incidence of distracted
| driving? That's really the only metric that matters.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| makes sense
|
| > _Drivers ages 16-17 continue to have the highest rates of
| crash involvement, injuries to themselves and others and
| deaths of others in crashes in which they are involved.
| Drivers age 80 and older have the highest rates of driver
| deaths. Drivers ages 60-69 were the safest drivers by most
| measures examined._
|
| edit: tangentially, physical controls of newer BMW are badly
| placed as well.
| dymk wrote:
| That group has always had the highest rate of crash
| involvement, even before touchscreens in cars were a thing.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| that's the point.
|
| the preferences of people with little or no experience
| shouldn't drive safety considerations.
| desmosxxx wrote:
| why? that still makes no sense.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| putting touch screens in cars to appeal younger
| generations is a legit market proposition, but forcing
| them on people who are familiar with other types of car
| controls and have been driving for decades should be
| considered putting them at risk.
|
| younger people prefer touch screens?
|
| make them optional and let the customers chose if they
| want them or not.
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| Ah, but how can you sell ad-space that way?
| dymk wrote:
| You think 16 year olds are buying a car for the
| touchscreen?
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| original post showed that they prefer them, not me.
| lunixbochs wrote:
| [2012]
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| Touchscreens in cars are great... for non-essential stuff. Want
| to change the backlight color for the instrument cluster?
| Touchscreen is a lot better for that (given a good gui menu
| system) than holding two buttons at the same time, then holding
| one, and clicking the other 6 times, waiting 3 seconds, and
| then clicking through the colors.
|
| Touchscreen for radio control, AC, answering (bluetooth) phone,
| and stuff... no, thank you, give me physical controls.
| tmh88j wrote:
| > Want to change the backlight color for the instrument
| cluster? Touchscreen is a lot better for that (given a good
| gui menu system) than holding two buttons at the same time,
| then holding one, and clicking the other 6 times, waiting 3
| seconds, and then clicking through the colors.
|
| Is that actually on a car that you've used? What a horrible
| design. A few Ford models have a dedicated button for ambient
| lighting that cycles through the colors, and a knob beside it
| to adjust the brightness.
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2TiKCEzQIA
| amelius wrote:
| Yeah, just look at the average office phone, e.g. [1]. Almost
| nobody knows what all those buttons do, and when you can
| press them. Just give me a touchscreen like I have on my
| smartphone!
|
| Same for printer menus. To get the IP address of your
| printer, you have to wade through 1-line menus and print a
| physical page, seriously?
|
| [1] https://cdn-web.vtp-
| media.com/products/CM/CM18445/CM18445_VT...
| tmh88j wrote:
| All of those buttons in the image you linked are labeled.
| What do you find confusing about it, and how would a touch
| screen make it any less confusing if you don't know what
| the labels mean to begin with?
| amelius wrote:
| The labels are mostly just one word, so not very helpful.
| That conference button, what does it do? Will it ask me
| to type in the phone numbers of to-be-invited
| participants?
|
| Also the buttons are not context sensitive. Ideally they
| should disappear when you can't press them. I want a
| basic interface with clear options, and unfolding menus
| whenever I want to do something more advanced like making
| a conference call.
| ant6n wrote:
| Well nowadays tough screen controls have no affordances,
| it's not even clear what areas can be pressed, much less
| what actions out will engage.
| tmh88j wrote:
| >The labels are mostly just one word, so not very
| helpful. That conference button, what does it do? Will it
| ask me to type in the phone numbers of to-be-invited
| participants?
|
| How would a touch screen change that?
|
| >Also the buttons are not context sensitive. Ideally they
| should disappear when you can't press them.
|
| Ok, so you enter a menu and now you have a "conference"
| button displayed, but you still have no idea what it
| does. I think touch screens are useful for actions that
| require a lot of interaction like entering navigation,
| but removing physical controls for basic inputs like
| volume knob or HVAC controls is an obnoxious anti-
| pattern, especially Tesla moving the wiper controls to a
| menu. Dirty windshields and worn out wipers are enough to
| make auto-sensing wipers act inconsistently. Removing the
| physical controls from them is a stupid fashion choice,
| much like Jony Ive screwing up the MacBook pro over the
| last decade in the name of design.
| switch007 wrote:
| > than holding two buttons at the same time, then holding
| one, and clicking the other 6 times, waiting 3 seconds, and
| then clicking through the colors.
|
| Why can't it be a dedicated dial? If you run out of room,
| maybe it's not so important
| tokamak-teapot wrote:
| The Mini has a dedicated button to switch instrument panel
| colours. Or at least, older models did.
| saganus wrote:
| That's the point of touchscreens I think.
|
| Being able to offer users a myriad of config options
| without the need for tons of knobs.
|
| Not saying I like it, but a lot of people seem to.
|
| I guess the ideal setup would be knobs for essential stuff
| like volume, AC, etc, and then a touchscreen for the rest
| of the stuff.
| [deleted]
| bmakdbd wrote:
| You want a dial to "change the backlight color for the
| instrument cluster"??
| stirfish wrote:
| It could go right next to the dial that changes the
| instrument panel's backlight brightness
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| You might be joking now, but:
|
| https://www.ebay.com/p/20004588697
| seoulmetro wrote:
| I drove a 40+ year old car for a while and it had one of
| these. Great feature, except that in old cars they always
| need to be at max these days due to all the street
| lights, etc.
|
| Now it's been replaced with headlight moving knob in
| newer cars, which is more awesome.
| stirfish wrote:
| My panel brightness knob is also the button that resets
| the trip meter.
| wizzwizz4 wrote:
| Or just have six dedicated buttons for "everything else":
| BACK | UP | ENTER / | LEFT ---- RIGHT
| | / EXIT | DOWN | MENU
| turtlebits wrote:
| IMO it's about UX than touchscreen vs physical controls.
|
| I bought a new Toyota tacoma and it has the worst UX I've seen
| in a vehicle. The touchscreen UI is bad, the physical button
| layout is terrible also. It took me a good 5 minutes to figure
| out how to turn off the truck bed light. The steering wheel
| button placement is also horrible.
|
| Even the push to start button has like 3 different modes (which
| I don't fully understand). A number of pushes for accessories
| only, accessories + power windows, ignition.
| nyc640 wrote:
| I think it's arguably both. Bad UX means that it's difficult
| to learn how to do things and can make it easy to press the
| wrong button even once you are used to it.
|
| However, having driven my share of cars that are exclusively
| touch screen, even when you know where something is
| (capacitative volume buttons, touchscreen climate change
| controls), it takes too long to find and adjust the settings
| compared to having physical knobs that you can easily reach
| over and adjust without taking your eyes off the road.
| hellbannedguy wrote:
| As a former mechanic, and some who has only once brought a car
| to a dealership for repair; my concern is Reparibility.
|
| My father bought his last new truck in 1998.
|
| The salesman ask my father about power windows, and other
| accessories. My father was a Shade Tree mechanic his whole
| life. He just looked a me, and said, "I hope I never see the
| day I can't roll down a window, and those motors are just
| another thing to fix."
|
| I was comfortable with the computer controlling the truck. I
| knew they had federal standards, and requirements. I also
| remember an instructor telling us, you will see a lot of
| mechanics replace the computer. It's not the computer. The
| failures rate of a vechicle's computer is extremely low. What
| happens is the mechanics damages the computer by checking it's
| ohms with the wrong DVOM, or short it out by accident.
|
| My point is about simplicity, and the availability of parts.
|
| I believe the only computers that the federal government
| demands high standards for are the main computer that you plug
| your scan tool into, and in many vechicles the sewerage power
| train computer.
|
| All those dash computers don't have the same quality demands
| from the government?
|
| I just don't want to see the day where only wealthy people buy
| vechicles because of maintenance/repair costs.
| skwirl wrote:
| Subarus still have physical controls, so I'm confused by your
| first sentence. They also include a touch-screen infotainment
| system, but it doesn't really replace any physical controls
| (except maybe favorite radio station buttons?)
| asaph wrote:
| > My dad just bought a new Toyota Civic and ...
|
| Honda makes the Civic, not Toyota.
| 1-6 wrote:
| Nitpicking is fun
| ianai wrote:
| Don't know about all of their models, but my Rav4 Prime has
| plenty of knobs and buttons. I think I only really use the
| touchscreen for changing Apple Car apps and switching Spotify
| playlists.
| 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
| I want to see the marketing studies where marketers provide
| evidence that touchscreens actually reduce costs and/or
| increase sales.
| youeseh wrote:
| I think Mazda makes cars that have a screen whose controls are
| physical.
| fishywang wrote:
| Yes. I had a last gen (2014 Mazda 3) and traded it in for a
| current gen (2021 Mazda 3) earlier this year. On last gen
| models they do have touch screen, but the touch part is auto
| disabled when the speed is above a low threshold (5 or 10
| mph). In the current gen they just removed touch part
| completely.
|
| With the last gen I only barely used the touch function in
| the pre-Android-Auto days, to help put the address to its
| builtin navigation system faster. Later they provided the
| optional upgrade of Android Auto (for $500) and I don't think
| I ever used the touch feature after the upgrade. In the
| current gen Android Auto is standard configuration and I
| never missed touching.
|
| Besides the removal of touching, they also have some other
| small but useful improvements on the screen on the current
| gen that I really appreciate:
|
| 1. They made the screen wider in the current gen, so with
| Android Auto you can have 2 apps displaying at the same time,
| usually maps and music, with one horizontal and one vertical.
|
| 2. They made the screen slightly slanted towards the driver
| in the current gen.
|
| Another thing I think most people don't realize is that the
| design around non-touch screen could mean that the screen can
| be placed to a better position. When the screen is touchable,
| it has to be within arms reach, which usually means it has to
| been lower, and the driver has to look down when they need
| some info from the screen. The current gen Mazda move it
| upper, so the driver only need to roll their eyes slightly to
| see it.
| crooked-v wrote:
| Yes, they had touchscreens for a while but started
| disabling/removing them from new cars (pre-COVID) for safety
| reasons. I believe their 2021 cars have all switched to
| physical controls plus one of those puck things.
| Waterluvian wrote:
| Out of curiosity which Subaru were you looking at? I got a 2020
| Forester with a touch screen but 100% of non-home-theatre and
| 75% of home theatre controls had physical interfaces. I was
| really quite happy with the balance.
| rodgerd wrote:
| > Is there ever going to be a movement towards these car
| companies going back to physical controls for this stuff?
|
| Mazda and Honda already are:
| https://www.motorbiscuit.com/honda-and-mazda-ditch-touchscre...
| jdjdjrj wrote:
| It should be obvious any romantic notions of things like
| helping the environment or saving lives are just costumes for
| the reality of most modern business motivations: making money.
| koheripbal wrote:
| I don't think these cynical comments add anything to the
| conversation.
|
| The reality is that even if the knobs and the touchscreen
| were identical in cost, the touch screen allows for a
| separation between the software and hardware design teams.
|
| It's quicker to update, enhance, patch, redesign, etc. It's
| just better from a manufacturing perspective, and aside from
| the tactile loss, allows more options and more data
| presentation for the consumer in a much smaller space.
| LocalH wrote:
| >The reality is that even if the knobs and the touchscreen
| were identical in cost, the touch screen allows for a
| separation between the software and hardware design teams.
|
| A touch screen is not required for that separation.
| Physical controls can also be interfaced to hardware in the
| same fashion. A knob control can be a "soft" knob, where it
| only reports the direction of rotation (or the current knob
| position, and the software determines the delta).
| CountSessine wrote:
| Sure, but now it doesn't have a label, or help text, or
| anything else you could implement with a touchscreen.
|
| Single-function knobs should be mandatory for anything
| you might need to reach for while you're driving, but
| seriously - what's with the physical control fetish?
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| <<It's quicker to update, enhance, patch, redesign, etc.
| It's just better from a manufacturing perspective, and
| aside from the tactile loss, allows more options and more
| data presentation for the consumer in a much smaller space.
|
| So this is my beef with this approach to today's
| manufacturing. It is never complete and relies on future
| updates. The final product is never fully delivered.
|
| It started with games, but the demographics skew young and
| those are not exactly savvy consumers. I lost it when Tesla
| was allowed to bring this model into cars. Constant updates
| including ones that affect how the battery you bough
| operates. Even if you buy the same model, it is not a given
| that the car will behave the same way ( as more recently
| evidenced by Model Y and "Phantom Breaking").
|
| And this is the part it don't get. Buying cars is not
| exactly a cheap affair. It can't be just the case of 'fool
| and his money', because the trend is being adopted by other
| manufacturers to an extent so there must be research
| suggesting people will buy it and anecdotally in my MBA
| class students were earnestly pitching IoT devices with
| subscription models for cars along the lines of 'this is
| about to break'.
|
| I just want something that works. It is a car. It is not a
| website. It is supposed to a job. You don't need to
| redesign UI every few weeks just to feel relevant.
|
| GDI, now I really feel old.
| consumer451 wrote:
| I am also a cynical, if admitting market forces is cynical.
| :)
|
| The only 75% cynical part of me thought that the move to
| touchscreens, removing ports, etc improved device lifetime
| and also lowered the unit cost of things like AppleCare.
|
| The less moving parts the less chance of failure, right?
| cassianoleal wrote:
| > The less moving parts the less chance of failure,
| right?
|
| Of failure by impact and vibration, perhaps. But that's
| pretty much a solved problem in car dials and buttons -
| we have decades ols cars with fully functional dashboards
| and controls.
|
| Otherwise, risk of failure is driven up by complexity, in
| which case a computer, with all its components, plus an
| operating system, drivers, etc, and apps on top of it add
| many layers of complexity in comparison with buttons and
| dials.
| Barrin92 wrote:
| >the touch screen allows for a separation between the
| software and hardware design teams
|
| it allows for the illusion that there is a separation,
| which isn't the case because when you're controlling a
| physical system through a digital interface both are
| inherently connected.
|
| What it likely allows for is significantly more bad design,
| because both teams have no idea what the other one is doing
| or how changes in one system affect the other.
|
| It's like arguing that separating the head from the body
| allows for better medical treatment because you can ship
| one to the psychologist and the other to physiotherapy when
| in reality you end up in the morgue (a fate you might be
| sharing with the touchpad distracted driver who was staring
| at data presentations while driving into the busy
| intersection)
| [deleted]
| gambiting wrote:
| Also it allows nonsense where clearly things are done
| because they can be, not because anyone in the world
| thought this was actually a good idea. Look at the latest
| Porsche Panamera, where the middle vent is directed by
| using a control on the touchscreen.....directly below it.
| So you replaced a simple and intuitive dimple on the vent
| that allows you to easily direct the vent without
| looking, to something that's hidden under a submenu, that
| you need to look at to use, and that takes several
| seconds to adjust because there's now a motor controling
| the vent orientation.
|
| Like, I honestly cannot imagine anyone at Porsche
| actually thinks this is a good idea - it exists purely
| because a team somewhere had to fill a quota for
| "features" they are responsible for.
| titzer wrote:
| There are also completely unusable by visually impaired
| people who need a completely different interface. I'm so
| sick of getting touchscreens shoved down my throat by
| pollyanna-ish types.
|
| (I am not currently visually impaired but have experienced
| several weeks of temporary blindness...it's a completely
| terrifying experience. Suddenly computers were almost
| wholely useless to me.)
| varjag wrote:
| Since we're talking about driver's dashboard here it's a
| very marginal case.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| At what level of visual impairment is one able to still
| drive safely? I'm not sure touch screens would be the
| biggest problem in that situation.
| simion314 wrote:
| I assume parent comment was complaining on physical
| buttons getting removed from many home electronics and a
| company removed keys from a keyboard and replaced with a
| touchbar thingy - though from what I read they had the
| courage to admit the users did not like it but nobody
| seems to think "let's do a real world user UX test before
| we do major changes because some vision person thinks
| this touch shit looks futuristic".
| gambiting wrote:
| Far sighted people can still drive safely, but might need
| glasses(or a different kind of glasses) to operate
| screens in a car. Where previously you could adjust
| things by touch and intuition, well, now you can't.
| wruza wrote:
| Yep, no more headaches if you have no head. Roll safe.
|
| Ultimately no one really uses these touchscreens cause they
| are ux nonsense. All this work done on redesigns (crap,
| where is that thing again?) goes straight to the trash,
| bypassing any criticism.
|
| _more data presentation for the consumer_
|
| Never heard it as an argument for buying a car. "Why did
| you choose BMW? Oh, you know that data presentation thing
| and more on-screen options!" I can't help but burst out
| laughing imagining this conversation.
|
| The only reason this happens is that it is a small thing
| embedded into a big one, and one doesn't simply turn the
| big thing down because of a (relatively) minor nuisance.
| When android or iphone design team break your workflow
| again, you sigh but don't throw it away, because it's still
| android or iphone and there are no alternatives. These
| touchscreen teams get ZERO negative feedback except some
| whining on tech forums.
| cormacrelf wrote:
| I rode in a Tesla for the first time yesterday and
| apparently drivers are putting up with with a constantly
| flickering, incredibly glitchy rendering of the car's
| knowledge of surrounding objects being juggled around
| like hot potatoes on the huge display panel. Would you
| prop up a full size iPad Pro on your dashboard as you
| drive, playing a YouTube highlight reel of Russian dash
| cam near-misses? No? Then why would you simulate that
| experience with these grey ghost cars, of which, in the
| 20 nauseating minutes I watched them, every single one
| appeared to be an imminent collision, poking into our
| lane?
|
| I hope Tesla is internally in shambles leadership-wise,
| because I would hate to be the person that gave the green
| light to shipping that and not be able to blame it on
| endemic dysfunction. What a farce.
| wruza wrote:
| That sounds terrible. And the worst part of it is today
| you can't rip it out and insert a good aftermarket part
| anymore.
| chmod775 wrote:
| Of course. But there's also rare examples of companies going
| above and beyond for no immediate gain.
|
| https://danluu.com/car-safety/
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23689538
|
| Volvo in the short term could not advertise their cars any
| better than their competition, who was passing the same
| tests.
|
| However in the long term (and we're talking decades here)
| them going above and beyond what was mandated earned them a
| reputation for safety.
| [deleted]
| Krisjohn wrote:
| "I'm a synthesizer designer, so I'm a bit biased towards
| knobs."
|
| Plenty of those still on the roads.
| ed_balls wrote:
| I don't mind a touch screen, but let me program the buttons on
| the steering wheel e.g. there should be a fn button. When I press
| it and arrows I can change the temperature. I'd have pretty much
| all important functions available without taking my hands far
| away from the steering wheel as well as my eyes off the road.
|
| I wish they would stop making capacitive buttons though. (VW,
| Audi and Mercedes - I'm looking at you)
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| I don't like touchscreens - sans the backup cam - cause I have
| glance at the screen (as opposed to a physical touch) to do
| anything. In addition, I don't use the car GPS, I use my device,
| etc.
|
| I think there was a time when screens were a novelty and they
| helped sway buyers. But now that that thrill is gone, they feel
| like an inappropriate UX.
|
| p.s. I like the backup cam but can certainly live without. I have
| for 30+ yrs so what's the big deal.
| tomekw wrote:
| Can't touch this!
| rektide wrote:
| One thing I haven't seen anyone discuss is phone interfaces.
| BMW/Jaguar were one company invested in the old Webinos IoT
| efforts that I personally thought were super super on point,
| which was a nice standards based system, that respected personal
| data. I kind of imagine anyone in the car having a touchscreen
| interface if they want it: just pull out your phone.
|
| We don't expect a good parity interface, but projects like
| Webinos or, heck, the Jeep QNX-OS hack, show great things are
| possible. The Jeep hack, fwiw looked amazing: a beautiful
| fantastic DBus interface for all the cars systems. I remain in
| love with the idea of hacking one's own car & building the
| fantastic interface the car maker are unable to build (and which
| would admittedly likely not suit all users; sad that software has
| so massified, must serve so so many, even though the consumers
| interest/abilities are not alike).
|
| Another X factor I want to throw out there: personally I really
| like to have the cabin dimmed way down at night. I don't end up
| in a lot of cars, but in my limited experience, I've never seen a
| touchscreen that comes anywhere close to being able to dim down
| adequately. So one of the first things I do in a car typically is
| figure out how to turn the display off.
|
| Even though I have a lot of touchscreen disastisfaction.
| ryanlol wrote:
| Yet another thread full of confused people who have never sat in
| a modern BMW.
|
| The driver has buttons for everything, the touchscreen is mostly
| for the passenger. There are no buttons added and removed between
| the touchscreen and not-touchscreen version.
| maxdo wrote:
| This touch screen hate reminds me of iphone vs nokia hysteria.
| Touch screen in the car is far more superior, has more usability
| pros and in the long term will make cars cheaper. Since it
| radically eliminates car design complexity.
|
| Usability: main trend, your car doesn't need so many overwhelming
| controls like in the past :
|
| 1. Tachometer, oil, temperature etc.. all go away due to electric
| cars. all you need to monitor regularly is speed. Even that
| partially replaces with speed sound notifications when you're
| above limit since cars are smart enough to read signs. Even
| something like windshield wipers is controlled automatically, far
| better and frequent reaction to the outdoor conditions. And it's
| just getting and better and smarter with time.
|
| 2. Phone-less experience: You don't need a phone mounted in your
| car somewhere if your car has a decent screen for navigation,
| internet and multi media. No wires, no annoying manual operations
| to mount/connect the phone every-time you sit in the car. No
| constant distraction, better security.
|
| 3. Drive controls: EV is far better at controlling traction, any
| kind of manual control has no meaning unless you want a "ride a
| horse" experience. Hence that, you mostly need steering wheel-
| mounted or even without it e.g. new model S. Floor-mounted is an
| anachronism and has nothing to do with usability since there is
| no logical reason to keep it on the floor. The only explanation,
| i'm old and I'm used to having it this way.
|
| 4. Air conditioner and climate control: touch screen is by far
| more superior as it gives you control from one place. You don't
| need to change settings from several places manually pushing
| something to get comfortable. Just count number of frictions you
| do , you change temp, you change flow in one place in the center,
| by the left door, right door... And that's every time you need to
| change settings. In most of the cases, you switch profiles, and
| you're good. It also works when you're switching the car. It
| knows what corner to blow the air, how strong, and what
| temperature you prefer in the previous car you drove recently. If
| you need the other passenger preferences or you're in the car
| just by yourself. If the car is heating, blow one way, if it's
| cooling do it other way...
|
| 5. Back up cameras: Any big screen gives you amazing
| observability, with several cameras. Simple rule of thumb the
| bigger the better.
|
| 6. Multimedia, full screen with movies, games, decent albums
| covers, in-car karaoke while on the trip... I guess this one is
| the clearest win.
|
| 7. Navigation: Yep, do you want to see a map on tiny phone or
| low-quality monitor or you want to observe your trip on a giant
| screen? No brainer unless you are biased.
|
| 8. Customization. Yeah, people are different. Manual controls
| don't let you do so.
|
| 9. Updates. Yep, manufacture can add extra features. Retrofit
| upgrades will work better since new/updated hardware can be
| easily integrated on the screen.
|
| 10. Keys, access management, security: You don't have keys, start
| button. You can leave the message that a car temperature is good
| and a dog is in good condition. You can programmatically restrict
| access to the glovebox when you're in valet parking, so no one
| will steal your documents, etc... it's so easy without manual
| controls.
|
| The summary is :
|
| if you drive a sport car, touch screen+EV is better, it will go
| faster, with better traction etc.
|
| if you like outdoor: same as sport, better driving, an overview
| of complex spots, maps, planning of your trip, notifications
| etc... companies like Rivian market offering is completely about
| outdoor, Cybertruck, Ford follows.
|
| if you like comfort, sit-and-drive feeling: EV+Touch+Voice screen
| is the best option. You don't need start buttons, manual keys,
| manual controls etc... Just approach the car, open the door hit a
| pedal, and drive.
|
| Despite all these pros, the main problem is implementation. Look
| at Volkswagen. They try to copy the success of competitors, but
| they've been cheap with hardware and usability, their screens are
| glitchy. But that's just bad quality. The same was with some
| first-gen touch phones, that were able to glitch even when
| someone calls you.
| timc3 wrote:
| Thanks. That was hilarious. Wrong in so many ways, but
| hilarious.
| thrower123 wrote:
| It should be illegal to put a touchscreen in a car that the
| driver is intended to use.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| Or at least that the driver _has_ to use (wipers, heating
| /defrost/defog)
| bluGill wrote:
| No, the driver shouldn't be able to use it at all. You have
| to take your eyes off the road to use it, and drivers never
| allow enough space to do that safely. When driving there
| should be nothing that the driver can see that isn't required
| to drive. Not even a radio station frequency indication, just
| hit scan or up/down until you find something you like (if you
| are loyal to a station program a preset while in park)
| mrfusion wrote:
| I don't like touchscreens but what's really cool is being able to
| search my owners manual on the screen. Such a minor feature but
| it's surprisingly useful.
| albertopv wrote:
| Good! I really prefer physical controls!
| ryanlol wrote:
| All of the affected models have physical buttons, literally
| nothing changed.
| Der_Einzige wrote:
| All the people in this thread here who hate touch screens don't
| know what the alternative looks like. I have a 2017 Lexus RX
| which doesn't have a touch screen, and it fucking SUCKS! Straight
| up had to get an after market android auto/carplay upgrade or
| else I would have sold this car given how frustrating the
| "joystick" is for controlling the infotainment.
| throwaway4good wrote:
| Exactly what component is missing here? The display is still
| there, as is the SOC running the OS that does UI. Is a shortage
| touch-enabled displays or display drivers?
|
| Is a part of the issue that these companies can do redesigns
| quickly enough, so they cannot change to other components that
| does the same thing only in a slightly different manner?
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| Maybe it's high risk to do mass production with untested
| components rather than revert to tried and tested components
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-28 23:01 UTC)