Hacker News Reader

Comment by Shivetya | Hacker News Reader

I will defend the screen in the Tesla 3, the simple fact is that you really never have to use on your typical drive and yes muscle memory works for simple UIs like what the Tesla employs.

Compared to 40+ buttons in my previous Volt AND a screen. Many cars have that many or more buttons and this is easier? Where screen's become distracting is when the UI is shit, having more than one or two clicks to do anything, and worse duplicating features there are physical buttons for but naturally distract the driver who thinks they should use that screen.

From automatic headlamps, climate control, and wipers, I really have no reason to interact with the screen except as glances while I do the standard look around while driving.

My favorite test... put a sticky on every button and only remove one if you truly had to use the function. bonus points for not having to remove the sticky to find out what the button did.

edit: spelling error

View on HN

Touchscreens that are huge are somewhat less of an issue because tap targets are much bigger. But most non-luxury vehicles come with 7 or 8 inch screens, so tap targets are small/clustered. Layer on that the fact that many screens aren't capacitive (and instead require a certain amount of pressure from your finger/fingernail), and things get even more annoying/dangerous.

"Somewhat" is not really good enough given the stakes. You cannot "feel" your way through a touchscreen interface and you cannot rely on muscle memory. You will take your eyes off the road to see where the button is and "aim" at it. And a bumpy road just makes it worse because it only takes an accidental light touch to trigger some random function close by.

Even a 17" screen or great UI won't fix the problems, they will just ameliorate them.

The are functions that just fit better into a touchscreen experience, and some that should have physical buttons even if it takes regulation to make sure of this.

I have a Tesla and previously owned a Lexus, I find that in practice it's pretty much identical with respect to taking eyes off the road. The only on-screen setting I ever adjust while driving the Tesla is the AC and in my Lexus I also make a quick glance down at the console because the row of buttons controlling AC functionality all feel the same.

After a few weeks of using any car I owned I basically stopped needing to look at the buttons. Even when there's a row of 4-5 identical physical buttons I just run my fingers across the row, this is where muscle memory comes in (like blind typing). The huge advantage being I can touch every button without triggering the function until I press.

I mean I'm not against huge screens in the car, as long as I can turn them off or dim them to the point where I consider they don't impede my driving. But I'd still very much like to see basic functions of the car tied (also?) to physical buttons. Whether the manufacturer also wants to put them on a screen that's fine but I see no good reason a handful or buttons and knobs can't fit in a car. The minor savings or the wow effect don't really offset the downsides of distracting attention.

> I'm not against huge screens in the car, as long as I can turn them off or dim them to the point where I consider they don't impede my driving.

This is an excellent point. Screens always emit more light than analogue gauges and buttons. When driving at night, dashboard lights annoy me so much that I avoid turning on the high-beams because the blue alert cluster light is so bright. I went so far as to wire up the dash lights to a toggle switch so I can shut them off independently of the headlights. This is on a 2003 VW Jetta, which has no back-lit screens.

With physical buttons we can keep eyes on the road, one hand on the wheel and the other one looks for the right button. With a touch screen we have to look at the screen, hoping we made the right decision about what's going to happen on the road. If there are laws against texting there should be laws against using touchscreens when the car is moving.

Fitts’s Law is really relevant here, even if the buttons were physical, but especially if they are touch based. Not all hit targets are the same in terms of safety.

Just how many controls are you manipulating that are not duplicated to your steering wheel on your drive? Modern cars feature nearly automatic everything, set and forget.

Just a note about laws against texting. So my state recently, finally last year, put in place a law which said you must use hands free.

Guess what happened, now half the dolts have their phone mounted to their windshield in their field of view or on their dash. So yeah, its hands free but even more distracting. Apparently this loop hole exists in many states!

The backlit display on the Tesla 3 is wayyyyy too bright for night driving, even at its lowest backlight intensity and in night mode. It is like they intentionally ignored all available human factors research. Tesla is not alone here. Many automakers these days have too-bright interiors for night driving.

I've been turning the dash light intensity almost all the way down for 30+ years. They've always been too bright. If the Tesla is as bright as you say, it would literally be undriveable for me at night. (No screens or touch in either of my 18-20 year old vehicles)

I have a model 3 and have no idea what they’re talking about, fwiw.

They should probably switch to an AMOLED and go with a dark mode for night driving?

The Volt had the worst of both worlds, though -- touch controls that weren't even a screen.

I own a Tesla 3 as well, and I mostly agree-- I have 0 need to adjust most controls manually, the auto stuff works really well.

But I don't think voice controls are a good 'fix'. I still wish the car had a physical glovebox button and physical wiper controls.

I remember i have read this a year ago.

https://www.nngroup.com/articles/tesla-big-touchscreen/

A Case Study of Car-Dashboard User Interface

And it was discussed here before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19968970

Im curious, have any of these problems been fixed?

  - Soft Buttons That Demand Attention
  - Poor Target Design
  - Target Size
  - Accidental Touches
  - Map Always on Screen

What I always get from these discussions is that people fiddle with their cars settings a lot more than I do. What are people doing that requires immediate attention? The only thing I am really tempted to use the screen for while actively driving a Tesla are to adjust the temperature and turn on defrosters. Everything else is handled with physical controls or can wait until I am stopped.

It's great if you don't have to use the touch screen in the Tesla while it's driving, but it shouldn't even be possible to use it with the car in motion.

I almost never drive by myself. Things that lock out my girlfriend from using them are very annoying to me. Android Auto does this on some features.

It's not like it stops people from just using their phones anyway.

It's not like it stops people from just using their phones anyway

By that logic, doors needn't support locks, because people can just break windows anyways. Likewise, why put safety features in cars, people can just ride motorcycles?

When you're making a thing, your job is to make that thing safe. The fact that people can use other, less-safe things does not in any way abrogate your responsibility for the safety of the thing you make.

If people routinely wore capacitive clothing, the screen could determine which seat the finger's owner was sitting in.

I know this is comment in jest, but could you actually identify who touched a screen? Do people have different physical characteristics that would give them a detectable capacitive "fingerprint?"

> It's not like it stops people from just using their phones anyway.

I'm finding that more and more people are bringing a software mindset to cars.

If it can be done wrong, we should add a technology fix to stop them!

It hasn't always been this way to anywhere near this degree.

It's not a software mindset per se. It's a level of control freakery that was kept in check by the fact technology didn't integrate as effortlessly before digital systems became ubiquitous.

One can be a software developer and resist the urge to control the user through dark patterns/software interlocks; unfortunately it seems there is a type of person drawn toward software development in the first place by the degree of empowerment and capacity to control it offers.

I've always understood the impulse/satisfaction I've gotten out of writing it; but for me the end goal was writing the perfect tool to satisfy the end-user's workflow/experience. I've never been fond of using software as a means of mass coercion via "middle-users"; and when I see, or am asked to be part of it, it's generally a safe bet a philosophical rant/entreaty isn't far away.

And besides which, screw Software interlocks. If it's important enough, dedicate hardware to it, lest you feel like ending up as the next THERAC-25/737-MAX.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com