Hacker News Reader

Comment by kjjw | Hacker News Reader

From the article it appears the screen's 'distraction' is not their only concern. Also of concern is the layered interface which requires one to navigate down several levels of menus to do things such as 'turn the fog lights on'.

View on HN

That sounds completely legitimate, actually. Touchscreens have no business being used to operate a car, since you have to look at them to work them, whereas I can operate every control in my old Pontiac without taking my eyes off the road.

Exactly; any car UI that requires you to look at anything but the road is really bad UI. This, to me, is a much more legitimate and concrete argument than "it might be distracting."

That was exactly my thought when I saw Tesla for the first time! I love how this car looks and that it's a technological marvel, but big touchscreen requiring you to look somewhere else instead of focusing on the road is a really bad thing. Recently I've started to think why won't car manufacturers create a good multimedia interaface displayed on the windshield. It could sense when you drive faster than some really low threshold and limit amount of UI elements and distractions. When it comes to controlling infotainment systems there IMHO are two reasonable options: first are buttons on the steering wheel, and the second is employing thing like MYO, assuming it works well.

Yeah, this is a place where the auto industry could learn from the console-gaming industry - give the users generalist, reusable physical controls and a HUD.

Exactly, I don't know why no one else has mentioned this before. It's a huge safety problem. and DOT should have done something about it.

Indeed, I find the article and the objections mentioned in it perfectly reasonable. The only question that interests me is a firmware update would be sufficient if it:

- disables non-essential features above a certain speed

- makes all essential features visible and usable without navigation

From the quoted law it sounds like this should be enough.

To be honest, I'm a little surprised that this isn't how the Tesla works. It's a car, and hiding something like the rear fog lamp behind layers of navigation sounds dangerous and should be forbidden.

Why? Fog lights aren't an essential part of car operation, may cars simply don't have them at all.

"In Europe and other countries adhering to UN Regulation 48, vehicles must be equipped with one or two bright red "rear fog lamps" (or "fog tail lamps"), which serve as high-intensity rear position lamps to be turned on by the driver in conditions of poor visibility to make the vehicle more visible from the rear."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_lighting#Rear_fog_la...

Ah I see how this might be important in Europe then.

Wow, that really surprises me. Now I'm thinking Americans must be driving in the dark in foggy situations, or are you required to stop your vehicles when sight is limited? I mean, I realize that fog lights can give you a false sense of security, not everything is illuminated, but I found them very useful. I'm thinking extreme situations, like ten meters visibility on the Autobahn.

I hope the fog lights thing isn't true since that would be absolutely mad. All the things a driver needs to toggle while the car is moving should be physical knobs with solid feedback for muscle memory.

Looks like most of it is touch, including the defroster and temp controls. http://blogs-images.forbes.com/briancaulfield/files/2012/06/...

That UI is so nice and so useless at the same time :(

Not only is it touch-only, but it's at the very bottom of the screen ensuring maximum time with eyes off the road to do anything important.

edit: http://www.teslamotors.com/models/features#/interior shows a video of screen operation (scroll down a bit). I really don't feel this thing is a good idea.

Did that video just reveal EM's mobile number?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com