The Touchscreen Infotainment Systems in New Cars Are a Distracting Mess | Hacker News Reader

The Touchscreen Infotainment Systems in New Cars Are a Distracting Mess

popularmechanics.com

163 pointsNN88135 comments

I wonder if there will be a resurgence of "dumb" cars once people get tired of and become more aware of the disadvantages of these overly-complex systems, like has happened with phones; IMHO one of the very few things a touchscreen is useful for in a car is a GPS, because that's a relatively complex system which can't really be simplified to physical controls. Everything else should really be knobs and switches. How much of a market would there be for a "dumb EV", basically the exact opposite of a Tesla but still electric, with only the bare minimum of electronics and software? Imagine a car whose interior looks like one from the late 70s/early 80s, with all analogue controls and indicators, except that it's actually an EV.

The other big disadvantage is the failure mode: if the screen fails, a whole set of functionality becomes inaccessible, whereas a single switch failure won't affect any others.

What you just described is the car i'd ideally like to own. I don't know much about teslas but aren't the motors and.much of the internals themselves computer driven? Without such a display is it possible to operate them? How much of the computer systems are tied into operation of the vehicle itself?

Sorry if i'm not understanding correctly, i don't know much about them other than what i've read, but from what i understand, the electric motors themselves are a smart system the way they're currently used in electric vehicles. Is it possible to make a completely dumb electric car?

The drivetrain the body and the infotainment are controlled by separate somewhat independent units if you lose the infotainment even if it's used to set the features on or off they should work, i haven't tested a tesla but most other cars run fine without it in some cases you just lose HVAC.

Ok. I honestly had no idea.

In the Tesla Model 3 you can manually reboot the entire infotainment system while driving with no ill effects. You lose all visuals, ability to change settings like the a/c, and even audio like the clicking of the turn signal. You do not lose any driving, safety, or even autopilot functionality. I'm sure there are many regulations around this too.

It's certainly possible, EVs have been around for about as long as batteries and motors have --- over a century:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_Electric

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henney_Kilowatt

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golf_cart

Computerised motor controllers are used because they can be more efficient, but regular electronic controls or even just mechanical ones are still common in things like golf carts and other "non-road-legal" EVs.

It would be more expensive to make and I doubt many people are willing to pay extra to have less functionality that's not upgrade'able and more expensive to maintain.

Knobs and switches are really (relatively) expensive, not even talking about all custom parts required to put them in nicely and time required to assemble them. I was very surprised about that when I got into electronics. You can basically get a SoC cheaper than a single decent on-off switch.

> Imagine a car whose interior looks like one from the late 70s/early 80s, with all analogue controls and indicators, except that it's actually an EV.

Something like this?

https://www.theverge.com/transportation/2017/7/27/16052118/b...

Yes, like that, but in the form of a car instead of a truck/SUV.

That looks absolutely amazing. But I've always been an old style military Jeep looks fan.

being multi-modal i occasionally rent cars, so i've seen a variety of infotainment implementations.

i'd love simplifying cars on two fronts: (1) the use of standard knobs and buttons for radio and air conditioning on the dash (in addition to a touchscreen for maps), and (2) removal of takeover features like lane assist and collision avoidance. i don't believe these "safety features" actually promote safety. instead, they allow people to be even more distracted and low skilled.

in one of the cars i rented recently, the collision detection system activated, not once but twice, while i was trying to avoid a collision. the autmatic braking almost caused an accident by disregarding my direct control. afterwards, i looked for a way to disable automatic collision avoidance but couldn't find it.

As a counter-point, the collision avoidance in my car has saved me from hitting a deer twice in the past 18 months. The brakes activated as my foot was moving towards that pedal. I’ve never had a false alarm activation.

This is with a 2018 Audi. YMMV.

Same in my 2017 Audi - prevented a sure collision with a deer, and like you my foot was still moving towards the brake when the car stopped. Also, no false alarms in 35,000 miles.

I have a 2015 Jeep Cherokee (not a recommendation, it's a terrible car in too many respects) and while it does have rare false alarms with Forward Collision Warning (not AEB) almost exclusively when driving on a single lane highway and approaching a vehicle that is part-way through turning off. FWIW I always leave the FCW set to its most sensitive setting.

I've never had an AEB false alarm in ~50,000 km.

I would never, ever own a car without it now.

I wonder how long it will be until the first "Boeing 737 Max MCAS" car model presents itself.

a lot of high end cars are allowing you to skip the huge screens in lieu of analog gauges.

its like the car industry forgot what made the iPhone great... a touch screen device that didn't suck. Before that, everything was a laggy bloated unpredictable mess that sometimes registered a fingerprint

> The other big disadvantage is the failure mode: if the screen fails, a whole set of functionality becomes inaccessible

Yep, the touch screen in my car cracked recently and the AC got stuck on a very low setting and was constantly blowing out cold air - there was no way to adjust it without using the screen.

It is not only the single point of failure that is annoying but the fact that to control the AC you need to use the touch screen in AC mode which mean switching from GPS mode or radio mode etc. Very distracting when driving.

Car designers: Please give us more knobs!

To be entirely fair I had the exact same problem with a "knob" interface. The variable resistor in the AC knob broke down putting the AC in the "just blow air as hard as you can, always" mode.

With a fully digital solution it should even be easier to provide workarounds for situations like that (e.g. remote screen on your phone). I'm not a big fan of touchscreens in cars though, but this particular argument doesn't feel strong to me.

Even older cars have cables (as in mechanical linkages) connected to those knobs.

I can replace a resistor pack for $20 with a single Phillips screwdriver. I can even (and have) replaced a transistor when I couldn’t find the part in stock (I had a box of large transistors from an old project). With a screen I am at the mercy of the dealership for what seems to amount to a ‘coolness factor’. Hard pass.

If everything is operated through the touch screen you lose a lot when the screen fails. With knobs only the function of the knob fails.

I can see this happening in a lot of these cars. Tesla does have a phone app that does most of the crucial things, assuming your car has data. You can adjust the climate controls, close the top, lock or unlock, start the car. Adjust the seat heaters.

The auto dealer's profit model is to keep the lights on with new car sales and make the real money through their service department.

Easily broken things equal more money for the service department.

I hate all the new stuff on cars because it's just more stuff that can break.

Source: I was a mechanic for a few years between stints at university.

I think it suits contemporary culture that cars with any kind of luxury pretense would catastrophically break in a small number of years.

Elon doesn’t want gross poors driving our beloved Tesla 3s in five or ten years!

The whole idea of the Tesla 3 is that poor(we) people will drive them in 5 to 10 years.

But you buy them new, not via the second hand market when Musk earns nothing.

So much for environment friendly.

I've considered buying an Audi for the sole reason that the screen retracts onto the dashboard when you're driving.

Not all of them do that. My 2017 A4 mmi system is fixed to the dash and does not move. No touch controls in the car though. The 2020 model is unfortunately getting touch controls for some things.

Why would you want to buy a car that has a centre console screen so embarrassingly bad that the auto manufacturer feels the need to make hiding it a feature? If they tried harder, they could make the screen so nice that the idea of hiding it would be absurd.

* They could integrate it with the vehicle's aesthetics better so that it looked fundamentally attractive.

* They could use a better backlight, better ambient light sensors and darker graphics so that it wasn't distracting at night.

* They could improve the passive screen state experience so that it was never ugly or distracting.

* They could use separate screens vigilantly so that touch interfaces are near to hand and notifications (e.g. volume changes, navigation, incoming calls, etc) are exclusively shown on a screen near the driver's forward vision.

* And most importantly, they should have physical controls for all common actions. You shouldn't ever have to touch the screen while driving. (Looking at you, Telsa.)

Instead, they attach actuators and mechanisms that are guaranteed to break, probably in the closed position, and you won't be able to use most of the car's functionality until you pay for an expensive repair. Embarrassing.

All Audi's I've seen, except for e-Tron have physical controls and don't require the screen. And being able to hide it seems like a perfectly fine option for the times when you don't need it. When you actually can adjust AC, radio, etc. with real knobs, and aren't using the map, why do you need it? Might as well be abler to hide it.

Not only that, but when you also have the Audi virtual cockpit, you still have an always-on display, which covers many of the functions available from the center screen. I like being able to retract the screen on demand, particularly on longer trips.

Even with a classic one, you get basic navigation instructions, infotainment data etc. on the center console.

Might as well? Be serious, it's a lazy hack.

Seriously? Giving user an option is a bad thing now?

Granted, on mine it is not motorized, but still, when I was driving at night on I-80 through Nevada, where as long as you do not manage to go off road navigation system just tells you "keep going straight for the next 600 miles" I liked turning the screen off altogether.

Audi has done a relatively good job of fighting the touch screen obsession. The 2018 Q5 I rented last year had no touch screen at all; it had a display, and it ran Android Auto, but you interacted through a jog wheel located in the centre console. After a few hours, using the screen was just muscle memory.

Additionally the screen itself is placed above the dash so it doesn't require looking down away from the road.

Because I don't want a screen. But if I want a newer car, they all have them, so a screen that hides most of the time is the best best thing.

Be careful, this may have changed. I bought a 2018 A3 specifically for this reason. I loved that the display could retract away on longer trips when not needed. However, there was a small change in production mid-year where the screen could no longer retract into the dash on demand. As soon as you turn on the car, the screen rises up and stays up until the car turns off. It was billed as a safety issue to be able to switch to the backup camera faster.

I ended up getting a slightly older version that had more test-drive miles on it.

I would be willing to pay a premium for a car with no integrated circuits.

Same, it's a lot cheaper to repair and probably safer overall since people can't drive by and take over it through the bluetooth stack.

Do you mean a brand new car?

There are older cars available that are in better condition than when they were new - but they won't meet today's safety and economy standards.

New cars can be physically safer but are vulnerable to an increasing number of other "virtual" things that wouldn't even be a concern for something much older --- like a remote attacker hacking into and taking control over the Internet, EMP, etc.

There are almost 100 traffic fatalities a day in the US. The number of crashes caused by hacking or EMP is approximately 0. Until such time as these theoretical attacks become a real issue, I'll take my modern crash safety improvements.

None? I doubt you'd be able to meet modern fuel economy requirements without an ECU.

I sort of share that sentiment, but in the extreme version that would mean no anti-lock brakes and no airbags, wouldn't it?

New cars in the USA (and many other countries) are required to have safety features like antilock brakes, electronic stability control, tire pressure monitoring, and backup cameras. Autonomous emergency braking looks like it will be next.

It seems like it would be exceedingly difficult (and/or expensive) to build a legal mass-produced car which has all of these safety features, using no ICs.

Early ABS implementations were mechanical. Ball bearings were involved, can't remember what else, but it was 50-50 what would be the winning the market.

Saloons of yesteryear were possible to park without backup cameras, driving instructors taught you how to look behind through the back window and you could see out the back then if the kids ducked down. It was easy for them to do so as they had no safety belts.

I think no ICs is a bit silly. However, I would like a car that was simplified in the extreme. This does not mean a 1990's or a 1970's car but something more ambitious. The simplifications I want to see are things like parts that can be swapped to left/right or front/rear. So one seat design, one bumper design, one indicator light design, one side mirror design and so on. Also I would want a carbon fibre shell that has no crumple zones, instead the seats slide forward/back to absorb the energy.

The thing would have to be fully EV with no frunk/boot, just have 3-4 foot of legroom in the back and more like a VW van of old with a cab forward design that is entered like a cockpit, so just one side door each side to the central area.

> It was easy for them to do so as they had no safety belts

It was also easier before increased crash safety requirements caused the C pillars to grow massively in size, robbing us of rear window size

I don't think you actually want that though--that would require a return to points for ignition and either carburetor or mechanical fuel injection.

Also likely a generator instead of an alternator, most alternators use ICs for regulation. Having dealt with these systems, I actively convert older vehicles to alternator & electronic ignition to improve the reliability. No ICs would mean the need for a tuneup multiple times per year, vs. modern cars that only require oil changes for regular maintenance.

I'm not the only person I know who would like a newer vehicle, and could afford one, but has opted for something made in the mid 90's. I can maintain it myself, it doesn't have all the distracting BS, and comes with a full size spare. The car you describe is the only new car I could be convinced to buy. Until then, I'll be keeping the 90's alive.

> I'm not the only person I know who would like a newer vehicle, and could afford one, but has opted for something made in the mid 90's.

Just so you know, the safety improvements since the mid 90's have been quite substantial.

There was a discussion recently (on HN, I believe) where a video was linked showing a collision between a mid 90's Accord and a modern equivalent.

The results were quite astonishing, to me at least.

It'd be nice if you could get the safety improvements without the UI changes, but as in software, that's not really in the interest of the manufacturer.

Cars from the mid to later 2000's have button and only had crappy touch screens for the inbuilt gps which is horrible. It was when the Tesla model S came out every manufacturer when screen crazy!

I've gone as high as mid-2000s and had no trouble doing the maintenance myself.

>> and comes with a full size spare

I am curious, how often do you need a spare tire, full size or otherwise?

Have you never gotten a flat tire? With a full size spare, it takes ten minutes to change, and you're on your way like nothing happened.

With a doughnut or run-flats, you have to limp to a tire shop to repair the tire or get a new one, and if you don't have a spare at all, it's a serious inconvenience at best, and a crisis at worst.

>>Have you never gotten a flat tire?

That's the thing: I do get a punctured tire... sometimes. Maybe every 2-3 years. Not critical, just losing pressure. Not urgent. Last time, local shop fixed it for $28. They gave me a little freezer bag with the nail that they pulled out of the tire.

Now, did I ever have a flat tire that needs a replacement like right now, with the spare tire? Well, I don't remember having that. In several decades of driving.

For the record, I do go to service to get regular maintenance, so every like 3-4 years or so I change tires. I guess that helps.

I'm completely happy hauling around a full size spare for a once in a decade blowout. Having that could easily save me 8 hours of frustration. Possibly more depending on where I am and what time it is.

I'm not carrying it for if I get a slow leak on my work commute, I'm carrying it for when I'm taking forest roads in durango, or driving across nebraska at 2am. I carry a blanket and chains in winter for the same reasons.

>I wonder if there will be a resurgence of "dumb" cars once people get tired of and become more aware of the disadvantages of these overly-complex systems

yes this is already happening. at least among car enthusiasts and "hipsters" buying vintage cars or stick shift/cars without all the technology

> a resurgence of "dumb" cars [...], like has happened with phones

When did that happen?

On the internet forums for enthusiasts, I bet. In real life, I agree, I haven’t noticed even a single blip of a trend for that phenomenon.

That part also got my attention. On which alternative universe do these guys live in? We have even come to the point of having no buttons on the front part of a phone (e.g. OnePlus 7 Pro), let alone going back to more buttons. I am also pro physical buttons in cars, but that argument simply doesn't hold.

But maybe there will be refinement and maybe more appropriate use of controls?

Touchscreens are great for selecting from a list (ok when driving), or onscreen keyboard (typing in a nav search, not when driving)

on the other hand there are inappropriate uses - sliders suck, small targets suck, etc

I would also mention that most aftermarket audio systems suck (think 1-high DIN). They have no touchscreens, no knobs, stupid lighting and lots of too-tiny buttons.

knobs are actually great. there should be appropriate knobs. They are great for continuously adjustable controls like volume or display brightness. Warning - they suck for selecting from a long list or typing an address letter by letter.

BMW i3 is, with nearing 5 years experience, pretty good at balancing dumb with tech.

Some aggravations exist: no wifi-update to software, really distracting forced overlay of the main screen with a multisecond advertisement to "keep your eyes off this screen" sort of message, and same behavior when shifting regenerative modes.

Built in nav and knob control is wonderful compared to touch screens.

> really distracting forced overlay of the main screen with a multisecond advertisement to "keep your eyes off this screen" sort of message

I was all prepared to buy a new head unit for my car until I noticed in a review video that it had one of these annoying overlays.

"Let's cover our ass and lower everyone's safety by forcing the driver to pay attention to, and physically press, on a stupid message every time they start the car". Bloody ridiculous.

The new 2019 Mazda3 has inset the screen and pushed it further back so you can't touch it and it's not even a touchscreen. I've been researching the car and it comes up in every review. The reaction seems pretty split on it so far even though everyone knows why Mazda has done it (less distraction, safer). It's a pretty bold move considering most other cars and touch and even going with bigger Tesla-style screens.

https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1121372_why-mazda-is-pur...

I have a few years older model Mazda 3 that has a similar system, although much less stylish. I like it for two reasons. I don't glance down when adjusting the radio or checking GPS and my eyes stay more or less on the road. The knob in the center console is a very intuitive control system that doesn't require very much attention or reaching to operate. The whole system is clearly designed to offer the full functionality of Android Auto or Apple Car while minimizing the possibilities distraction.

I recently purchased the 2019 Mazda 3 and absolutely love this about it. All controls are physical buttons/knobs that are sensibly placed so the driver can access them without reaching. The screen is nice and big without being obnoxious, and the built-in infotainment UI is very modern and easy to use. And it also supports CarPlay which is wonderful.

I've always been at a complete loss as to why and how we ended up with the archaic and clunky in-car systems we have today.

If you look at a smartphone from 5 years ago and a vehicle from 5 years ago, the capability of the phone is going to dwarf that of the in-car infotainment system. In all honestly, that 5 year old phone will likely out perform most of the infotainment systems in vehicles rolling off the assembly line right now. I don't even want to think what consumers are being charged on a line item basis for the outdated hardware in vehicles.

I still can't figure out why car companies are even attempting to build these systems themselves (besides profit, I suppose). Pretty much every American has a phone in their pocket that is much more capable than any infotainment system, and it specializes in the things we mainly want from an infotainment system (music, maps/gps, txt, calls).

Wouldn't it be so much better if vehicles just had a barebones screen in the dash with a connector for smartphones to power the system? You could even have the screen size mirror the resolution of the phone so it's just scaled up and rotated. Doesn't seem like much else would have to be done.

I'm sure I'm over simplifying things to some extent, but it still seems like a setup like this would be much easier to produce and much better to use than anything coming from car companies who are typically pretty terrible at software and UX design.

*of course not all vehicles are for Americans and not everyone has a smartphone.

A big reason is the backup camera requirement[0]. Why just have a screen for the backup camera when it's marginal to add on the other features.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backup_camera#Mandates

I wasn't thinking about the cameras I guess.

Still seems like it would be better to just include what's required and then let a phone handle the software.

My newest car is a lousy old 2015 model. I rented a small (2018?) SUV recently and it allowed some of the apps on my phone to take over the screen. I discovered this by accident because my goal was to have the phone connected to the USB for power while I ran the navigation app on it. It was great for navigating to a known destination. It was not so great for finding the nearest Starbucks.

My 2015 piece of junk requires a $500 p.a. subscription to receive traffic data for the navigation system. That is about 5 new Garmins a year, or 1.25 Pixel 3a's, a phone I don't own but have heard good things about.

That's all nice and well, as long as you are in cell tower range. I drove mine cross-country through places where you get 0 cell coverage. Having a navigation system that actually works is pretty nice.

Navigation on a phone doesn't require cell coverage -- it works the same as your car, just download the map you need.

That at the very least presumes that you remember to do that in advance. And that this functionality is actually available to do. Last time I tried, e.g. Google Maps would not download offline maps in some countries.

Slapping a tablet in place of the infotainment system is possible, but you make serious compromises on reliability. A tablet was never designed to sit in a 120 degree Fahrenheit car for days on end, Tesla has felt this issue acutely.

Tesla tried to just stick common modern tech in their cars instead of outdated "automotivr grade" hardware and are paying the price for it https://www.thedrive.com/tech/27989/teslas-screen-saga-shows...

> Wouldn't it be so much better if vehicles just had a barebones screen in the dash with a connector for smartphones to power the system? You could even have the screen size mirror the resolution of the phone so it's just scaled up and rotated. Doesn't seem like much else would have to be done.

Don't most new cars these days support Apple Carplay and Google Android Auto? That's basically what they are, (h264 video cast of the screen and a back channel for touch/button input)

I have an Alfa Giulia and the knobs are amazing. It is always in reach of my hand since they are located right in front of the gear shifter and flipping through the menus became intuitive after a couple hours. No fingerprints is an added bonus. I don't have the nav option, so inputting addresses or other long things might be cumbersome (but likely unnecessary with Android Auto or the Apple version).

Image of the controls for those curious: https://car-images.bauersecure.com/pagefiles/85459/alfa_rome...

The large round dial is used for most of the menu navigation. The small one to the right is for changing radio station/tracks and volume.

By comparison, my fiances Jetta's touch screen was pretty cool when we first got it. But then noticing how unresponsive it was, misclicking, and dirty it gets I don't think I will go for a touch screen again personally.

Not to mention the Giulia is gorgeous.

I spent a year researching ways for making touch screen interfaces usable without demanding visual attention (in a medical context, almost as fun). It’s really really hard to beat tactile, physical knobs and switches. Tesla can do way better than they are doing. Operating the radio etc. on their touch screen is virtually impossible without taking your eyes off the road for dangerous amounts of time. Despite knowing this, I still ordered a Model 3.

I'd like to mod my Tesla Model 3 to remove that huge screen and put the screen on the dashboard in a smaller screen behind the steering wheel, and the controls on the steering wheel itself. Maybe even with a reflective visual off the windshield close to the dashboard so the driver doesn't have to take their eyes off the road.

The research for this hasn't yielded much since I can't alter the UI at all.

your desired request for screen behind the wheel is available of course. This is known as the model s.

You can still perform most common radio functions with the physical buttons on the steering wheel in the Model 3, and there's also voice control.

Having dealt with various tech distractions in cars since before the introduction of cell phones, I don't see how the NTSB hasn't banned touch screens. My older car has a standard radio (dials and buttons), and I still almost rear-ended someone while changing radio stations after a long day.

I too have a huge problem with touch screens in cars. Having tactile knobs means I can find things on the dash without taking my eyes off the road. The thing that I think most of the comments are missing is the thing that powers all tech... Ads

There is currently a push behind the scenes to own the in-car advertising system. This is a reason why Google is making a play for an automobile OS [0].

I desperately hope that car manufacturers return to physical buttons, but in-car ads are offer huge potential financial upside. You could sell a car at a loss to consumers and still come out ahead...

[0] https://www.android.com/auto/

I want to just speak to the car like I do with Alexa or Google Assistant and have it work the same in the car and in the house. How hard is this to accomplish in 2019?

Me: (Alexa/Okay Google/hey Siri) - set car temperature to 70 degrees...

Car: Okay, temperature is set to 70 degrees

No buttons, no unintuitive touchscreens, no taking eyes off road, no taking hands off steering wheel, just simply getting what you ask for. This technology is baked into phones already so this isn't exactly rocket science or some futuristic sci-fi technology, car manufacturers need to get with the 21st century and allow this level of integrations.

Anyone know why it's taking so long to get this functionality?

> Me: (Alexa/Okay Google/hey Siri) - set car temperature to 70 degrees...

>Car: Okay, temperature is set to 70 degrees

You might want to pre-order the upcoming Volvo Polestar 2, as it has Android Automotive[1] (not to be confused[2] with "Android Auto"!) which has this functionality

1. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/02/the-volvo-polestar-2...

2. Whoever named this project was probably in the same role at Microsoft in the '90s

Really cool, thanks for sharing!

Am I using the same system that the reviewers are using? These kinds of assessments are a bit of a red herring. If you have to use the touchscreen you’ve already lost. But when I drove a rental car recently, CarPlay+Siri pretty much took care of it all for me, including responding to a text while I was driving.

To my understanding, Android Auto may even be better because of Google’s superior voice recognition. The touchscreen is there to convey more information, not to be used as a means of control.

All I want is a button easily available from my steering wheel to talk to the mobile assistant I'm connected to over Bluetooth. I know it's far too much to ask of any company to support both Android and Apple, so this is my compromise.

Tesla's infotainment isn't horrible, but I should be able to use voice to do all the things they have shifted into a non-tactile interface.

We installed the CarPlay retrofit for our recent model Mazda CX-5 and it does exactly this. The CarPlay interface completely takes over the vehicle interface and the buttons are mapped in a way that makes sense: home takes you to the home screen/springboard, nav opens Apple Maps or whatever navigation application is currently running, and music opens whatever media application was last selected. Most importantly the voice assistant button on the steering wheel triggers Siri.

Best $250 I’ve ever spent and the utility of this keeps improving as more apps add CarPlay support.

I’ve done the same thing on my 3 and agree. Also quite like using the knob to select compared to touching

That's exactly how the Tesla system works. You press the right thumbwheel on the steering wheel, (or the button above it on the S) and say "play rolling stones" or "play BBC World Service News" or whatever, and it just does. The left thumbwheel is the volume and you push it to the right to skip to the next song or station. The right thumbwheel changes the speed while on cruise control and I do sometimes mix them up and turn the volume up when I want to go faster or visa-versa.

And everyone seems to use blue colors in car displays. They leave color aftereffects when you look displays and then quickly trough windshield. Especially in the dark.

Yes, red is much better at night (IIRC it doesn't dilate your pupils as much). But blue is the trendier color for lighting, and I don't suspect many people take test-drives at night.

how practical is a heads-up display?

that's what I want for ease of use, safety, aesthetics.

I just got a 2019 Volvo V60 and it has a HUD. It’s somewhat customizable, and displays the current speed limit, your speed, an optional warning if you’re following too close, and even GPS nav instructions. Pretty nice.

The car does also have a huge distracting touch screen.

There are obviously a hundred ways to make a touchscreen terrible. Laggy, distracting, too small touch points, bad touch sensitivity, low contrast, overly nested menus, etc.

But “haptic feedback” isn’t a panacea and there are plenty of ways to make buttons that you still have to look at to use effectively.

My old 2006 Infiniti G35 which I had for 12 years, I would still have to look to turn on the front/rear defogger. Or even to adjust fan speed. The buttons were arranged in a flat row and there was no way to distinguish one from the adjacent without looking. Even with more depth you would still glance over to find your target and confirm the state change.

The large touchscreen in my TM3 makes navigation an absolute joy. When I’m at a complex intersection, pinch to zoom in and I can easily see at a glance what to do. This beats squinting at an iPhone by a massive margin. I never thought in-car GPS made any sense at all and activately hated the systems I had seen in Audis and Mercedes. Dialing in destinations was a huge pain and the screens were small and non-interactive making the system worse than a phone-in-hand.

So it’s obvious to me that large touch-screen interfaces can be joyful and safe, and even enhance safety in some cases.

There are also two massive benefits which most articles miss or just gloss over, and that is upgradability, and dynamic state.

My TM3 shipped without blind spot warning, or lane departure warning, or Navigate in Autopilot, or a dashcam, or Sentry Mode, and dozens of other features that have since been added.

Legacy manufacturers want to sell you a new car every time they add a new feature. Knobs are great for this because it’s pretty hard to shoehorn a new feature into an existing hard-labeled set of knobs. A touch interface—done right—can evolve over time to support dozens of new features which improve the driving experience.

A car that gets better (and faster, and longer range) every month is no small wonder. Rather I think it’s the bane of the legacy model and the old guard is terrified by it, because their entire ecosystem isn’t set up for it.

The second key advantage is dynamic state — or rather, the idea that the system state can change independently from the knob. Now it is possible to design certain types of knobs and switches which can accommodate this type of state change, but there is a whole host of knob and switch designs which are outright excluded if you want to support that case without adding a motor to physically move the knob/switch (which would be ridiculous). And these “stateless” knobs and switches tend to be the ones which provide significantly less feedback and are more likely to need to be looked at to be manipulated / confirm the state change.

Of course it’s important to note that it’s not all or nothing. The reality is that knobs on or right around the steering wheel will always have a place for activating the most common features. Several articles miss, for example, that TM3 does have a button to activate the wipers. The screen then automatically shows the interval status (which on mine is always just ‘Auto’)

And the most useful button is the one you can eliminate completely by automating it out of existence. Like that complex multi-position dial so many cars have to the left of the steering wheel to configure the headlights. I see cars all the time driving at night with the switch inadvertently set to daytime running mode. There’s no dial in the TM3, because the lights just always do the right thing.

> without adding a motor to physically move the knob/switch (which would be ridiculous).

AFAIK this is actually done in airplane cockpits. It may be overly expensive, but it isn't ridiculous.

A more mundane application of this is found in a lot of older stereo systems, where e.g. the volume buttons on the remote control cause a motor to turn the physical volume knob on the unit itself.

Digital sound and lighting control surfaces too. Gets you multiple logical layers from the same encoders.

I'm at the point where I'm avoiding cars with too many touch screen options for vehicle control. That UI is a life and death decision and I'm not joking.

> There’s no dial in the TM3, because the lights just always do the right thing.

Do they go into parking lights only as requested by signs when driving onto the washington stste ferries? Or do they shine the bright headlights at the ferry workers?

To your point, do they also turn on in broad daylight when passing roadwork on the interstate, as is required by law in some states?

There isn't a physical dial, but it can still be controlled via a menu on the touchscreen. I don't think it's anymore intelligent than the light sensitive automatic headlights on any other car.

> Like that complex multi-position dial so many cars have to the left of the steering wheel to configure the headlights

I drive multitude of different cars and models and i can assure you that i can find and operate most of the basic controls at first glance, lights are at the left wipers at the right, first position is parking, 2nd low beams, 3rd high beams, pull stalk flash, push stalk high beams. there are some exceptions but it's like that most of the time, it's intuitive.

I had that same year G35, I remember it having far too many buttons on the dash. The flip side of everyone arguing that buttons and knobs are better.

IIRC it has this really tedious dial to use the GPS, but you could raise and lower the GPS screen and it would lock you out when the car was moving.

IMO my new Volvo let’s me fiddle with too much while driving.

Given that aesthetic experience is something the automotive industry actually prioritises, I supect the security problems with these things is going to be much worse than the usability.

I’ve never understood why all the centre-dash controls have, since time immemorial, been angled away from the driver.

Radio control is one plausible compromise but defroster? Navigation?

Seems to be a lot of words for what we know already: knobs and switches good, touchscreen bad.

As an example of exactly the sort of broken design thinking that will make cars unsafe, I'd like to repeat a comment I made in 2017:

In one of the talks at Google I/O last year a VP from Audi (or Volvo?) spoke in a thick and lofty German accent about how "ve haf completely oferhauled ze driver exzperienze". He played a sexy video clip showcasing their new Android infotainment system (something like https://youtu.be/h_7_fKJ0PNs), and the first thing I noticed is how they'd taken away my traditional temperature knobs and replaced them with digital touchscreen ones. They looked just like physical ones, and were in the exact same place you would expect (https://9to5google.com/2017/05/15/android-cars-audi/). So, I've gained absolutely nothing, and now I have to take my eyes off the road and look down at the stupid console just to change the temperature.

TLDR: Tacticle feedback is a Good Thing(tm) and designers should cultivate - not fight - muscle memory.

bring back tactile interfaces please

CarPlay is excellently done. The UI is consistent and sensible, and the devices usually respond quickly. However the problems start when the car companies have built their own UI around or over top of CarPlay, and those UIs are often slow to respond, often use resistive touch screens which are difficult to use, and the UI conventions in a Jeep, in a Ford, in a Cadillac might as well exist in different universes. There is no standardization, and therefore no way to get truly comfortable.

I've used CarPlay on several vehicles and it's not distracting at all, because I know exactly where everything is, and I can get to it and get what done I need to rapidly and with precision. The issues come when I have to use the rest of the system, which is a complete crapshoot in terms of where to find things like climate controls and adjustments to be made to the car.

And for God's sakes, dump those resistive touch screens in the trash.

Theres spy shots that the new S Class will be all touch screens. https://www.motor1.com/news/337416/2021-mercedes-s-class-spi...

What the hell are people thinking?

The range rovers, Porsche's, and Audis are going that way too.

How can this be remotely positive?

Its like these cars are made for leasing, ONLY. They can't be thinking about long term reliability.

Automakers seem to be in love with leases and they're pushing them hard, so I can see them prioritizing features that makes leasing more attractive.

1. I think Tesla-style control-via-screen-only is akin to the 'Open Office' -- that is, a stupid trend that will be overcome, eventually, by the saner among us.

1A. Folk who are 'visual first' probably like Control-via-screen-only. I'm a 'tactile' and 'auditory' first guy. I have very good spacial muscle memory. I can close my eyes and dead-on any control in my trusty '95 LS-400.

1B. I would prefer even the common displays (e.g. speed) be given to me via morse code when I push a steering wheel button. At 50 WPM it would take as long as a glance, with no eyes-off-the-road. But I'm weird.

2. Yesterday I turned in after a 3.5 yr lease a VW eGolf. I asked them how well they were selling the vehicles that have come off lease. Guy said they just 'park them in the back' and he's never seen one of them sold. I don't know what they do with them, but I definitely concur that there seems to be a push toward leasing.

2A. The prices for the 2019 eGolfs with more features than the 2016 SEL version were about 10% less. And I thought the 2016 prices were pretty good. I don't understand.

The subscription is coming. Direct from manufacturers side stepping the dealerships. Especially in the era when not owning is perceived as wealthy.

Leases are a giant unsustainable bubble.

There has been some speculation that automakers are going to be left holding the bag but it seems they don't share that fear.

>They can't be thinking about long term reliability.

That's been like that for a long time already even if you buy it, once it's out of warranty it's your problem not the manufactures's anymore, they are following the same path of consumer electronics, since they need to come with a new product every year and try to impress the public the only way is making them as flashy and sci-fi-esque as possible even if is unusable or it will last 2 years.

The fully leveraged life of a luxury car:

1. Lease vehicle to some rich person for the first 3 years who will have few to no problems and return it to the dealership for the next new model once the lease ends.

2. Dump it on some middle-class person making an aspirational purchase as "certified pre-owned". The car starts to break down pretty much the day after it turns 3 since that's how it was designed. The owner will be forced to pay extreme repair bills if they go to the dealership or just live with things continuing to break as the car ages.

3. Once the car hits 6-8 years old it will get resold to the super shady "imports" used car dealership down the road from the original dealership who will then sell it to some poor person making an aspirational purchase on a 9 year loan with exorbitant interest. They will be forced by the high payments to either drive it into the ground or get it repossessed. If repossessed, repeat step 3.

I had a rental with CarPlay a few months back. First time I've had one of the infotainment systems that wasn't a massive exercise in frustration to use. It also wasn't all hot to trot to download various contacts, etc. from my phone like most of them seem to be.

That’s because CarPlay is essentially a second screen for your phone. Everything runs on the phone, which already has your contacts.

And for God's sakes, dump those resistive touch screens in the trash.

They are used not because of cost, but so that drivers with gloved hands can still operate them.

imagine driving this in the winter

https://di-uploads-pod1.dealerinspire.com/landroverwillowgro...

Even the buttons on the wheels are touch "buttons" not physical ones

And for their ability to survive extremes of temperature and humidity. Awful to use, but they do continue to operate.

But manual controls (with differently-shaped knobs) is a superior system.

remember the rule: hardware companies suck at software.

surprisingly, standard car audio systems are almost universally better than aftermarket ones. And if you've ever disconnected your car battery and come back to a factory reset aftermarket audio system, in demo mode, that goes x100.

> And for God's sakes, dump those resistive touch screens in the trash.

Can I please make a case for the opposite being true? Capacitive touch is a million times better for a tablet, but resistive touch screens are far better suited to touch input while driving because they respond to pressure, not mere presence. This means it's far less distracting to use.

_________Capacitive touch_________

1. Look at screen

2. Observe what you want to press

3. Move your finger to a space in mid-air in front of where it needs to be

4. Refine your finger's alignment

5. Touch the screen

6. Look away

__________Resistive touch__________

1. Glance momentarily to observe what you want to press; return eyes to road

2. Move finger where it needs to be, using friction between finger and screen to hold it in place

3. Glance momentarily at your finger's position; return eyes to road

4. Refine your finger's alignment

5. Push your finger at the screen

Neither capacitive nor resistive touch screens have an acceptable use in a moving car. Drivers should use the rotary knob and voice controls instead.

Rotary knobs are worse because you need to look at the screen to watch the highlighted element jump around until it lands on whatever it is you want selected.

To be fair, they're the least bad of all the centre-console input devices. And they're an acceptable option if the screen is placed outside comfortable reach of the seated driver.

But they're still inferior to a well-positioned capacitive touch screen.

Tactile switches should be mandatory.

I wonder if Tesla's silly games will be banned anytime soon.

The one car that actually gets software right?

Tesla fanboys can be quite annoying, true, but I don't think actively killing them is a "right thing".

Why would they be? They're not playable when the car is in motion. I believe there's a car that has an HDMI input for that when the car is not moving

Putting Easter Eggs in ECU software is kinda ... reckless?

The display UI shows velocity, warnings etc so it's not a like a entertainment and navigation system. Why add useless software and the mandatory bugs too it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com