return to table of content

Volkswagen Will Bring Back Physical Buttons in New Cars

sschueller
75 replies
4h37m

How many people died (this includes pedestrians) because someone tried to adjust their AC in a multi level menu touch screen?

The regulators are literally asleep at the wheel and this should have never been permitted for any critical adjustments such as temperature and even audio volume. The hazard button being the only exception is not enough and Tesla turned that into a capacities touch button on the cybertruck making using it with wet hands or gloves impossible.

In Switzerland you get fined if you eat while you drive! Having to hunt and take your eyes of the road to adjust the temp is way worse.

Now if touch screens had a dynamic 3d surface that you could navigate blindly it would be something else.

crazygringo
14 replies
4h29m

How many people died

I don't know, have any?

To play devil's advocate, trying to adjust the AC using regular buttons on an unfamiliar rental car can be a nightmare too. Trying to decipher the tiny icons and lights while driving, what magic combination of button presses and knob positions will work?

There's an argument to be made that for something like temperature control with its various modes (heat/vent/cold, strength/temperature, fan speed, which combination of vents), a large touchscreen is actually a far superior interface -- easier to see and more intuitive.

(Physical touch buttons on the steering wheel for basic adjustments-while-driving like temperature up/down and volume up/down are still important though.)

herodoturtle
4 replies
4h20m

trying to adjust the AC using regular buttons on an unfamiliar rental car can be a nightmare too

I don't agree with this logic.

When you rent a car it's common sense to familiarise yourself with the controls before you start driving it.

bluGill
1 replies
3h39m

Mostly that isn't needed because the controls you need are generally obvious. Every car has accelerator and brake pedals (some also have a clutch) in the same position that works the same with no need to look. Likewise they all have a steering wheel in the same position that again works the same as every other car.

They have turn signal indicator that works the same. Most cars it is a lever off the side of the steering wheel. One car I drove (at night) instead had a switch on the dashboard - I successfully used this to signal my turn several times before I realized it wasn't a lever - but it worked like one so it didn't matter.

Because car makers have historically been good at doing consistent UIs like this when I get into a rental car the only think I need to figure out is where the key goes and how the transmission shifts (shift levers can be many different places and have many different patterns). Everything else important to driving is the same on all cars.

Things like the radio and climate system are not the same on all cars. However they are not critical to driving.

generic92034
0 replies
3h18m

Things like the radio and climate system are not the same on all cars. However they are not critical to driving.

They can be critical to driving, if you have to move your focus from the street to the screen for changing the settings.

jsight
0 replies
4h1m

Apparently you haven't watched people leave the rental area at the airport.

ExoticPearTree
0 replies
3h53m

You know the saying: common sense is not that common.

tokai
2 replies
4h19m

Devils advocado is not some incarnation that makes saying the opposite into an actual argument.

ricardobayes
0 replies
4h1m

Devil's avocado? Sorry, couldn't resist that one.

ToucanLoucan
0 replies
4h2m

Doesn't change that we have no statistical data for "deaths caused by touchscreens." The nearest offered in the federal numbers that I can find is distracted driving which accounts for roughly 4,000 (which is an estimate) of the ~43,000 that occur in the United States, or ballpark 10%. But that 4,000 estimate includes things like cell phone distraction, your kid screaming in the back seat, or just straight up people not paying attention to the road. And, worth devils' avodacoing here, many newer infotainment systems include things like CarPlay and Android Auto which can if anything mitigate the distracting factor of shitty OEM interfaces.

I don't know how bad they actually are, I know there's been a drumbeat in media recently about how bad they are with no real data I've ever seen to back it up, and I know that I've, at this point, driven more miles with aftermarket touch screen interfaces than I have without and I have yet to be involved in even a minor accident, let alone a fatal one.

nicoburns
0 replies
4h20m

trying to adjust the AC using regular buttons on an unfamiliar rental car can be a nightmare too. Trying to decipher the tiny icons and lights while driving

Ideally you ought to take 5 minutes to check these things out before you set off. And if there are buttons you at least can do this if you want to.

jsight
0 replies
4h1m

You are absolutely right, tbh. People make this into too much of a binary choice.

I've had cars with terrible physical controls and cars with really well thought out touchscreen controls combined with a lot of automation.

It isn't obvious that fumbling with buttons below the wheel, near my knee is better than the screen right in front of me. I can't even find them by touch easily, because they've made so many of them, including for nearly useless functions.

jlg23
0 replies
3h59m

There's an argument to be made that for something like temperature control with its various modes (heat/vent/cold, strength/temperature, fan speed, which combination of vents), a large touchscreen is actually a far superior interface -- easier to see and more intuitive.

I agree with "easier to see and more intuitive" and I'd use it when parked. But when driving, I don't want to "see", I want tactile feedback on whether I hit a control.

jasongill
0 replies
4h23m

I think the difference here is that you are arguing that your first time adjusting the AC in a new car is cumbersome and distracting, which of course I think everyone can agree upon.

What the others in this thread are commenting on is the fact that in cars with touchscreen based controls, every time you adjust the AC in a car you drive every day, it is cumbersome and distracting.

hackernewds
0 replies
4h26m

you can use one of your senses (touch) while operating the car with another (vision) with physical buttons. I feel like your argument supports better designed physical buttons vs more touch buttons, with zero haptic feedback

closewith
0 replies
4h27m

There's an argument to be made that for something like temperature control with its various modes (heat/vent/cold, strength/temperature, fan speed, which combination of vents), a large touchscreen is actually a far superior interface -- easier to see and more intuitive.

There is no argument. This is a ridiculous idea.

planb
12 replies
3h58m

Can we please first analyze the problem before we call for regulation? Are touch screens really causing accidents or are they just inconvenient?

I hate touch screen controls in cars for things that are adjusted during driving like everyone else here. But please let’s not go for a default of „the state has to allow it“ for all new inventions - as dumb as they may be.

jvanderbot
2 replies
3h46m

Well yes - there has been some research on the use of touch screens in safety critical systems. For example: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49319450

    "We got away from the physical throttles, and that was probably the number one feedback from the fleet - they said, just give us the throttles that we can use," said Rear Adm Galinis.
(EDIT: TFA also talks about buttons, and not being able to find information on screens).

OP article is probably a case of the market working it out if Volkswagen is doing it without regulation. I doubt Tesla-like multi-modal touch screens are going to be default ever. They were never a good idea.

But regulation is essentially the people coming together to say "never again", and that is their right in a democracy. Like it or not as inventors or inventor-adjacent folks we might look more harshly at it. But we also have that power and I don't see a problem per se in using it to direct the market on somewhat trivial things like this.

My wife will finally be able to use my phone chargers b/c of the EU legislation on apple chargers.

jansan
1 replies
3h38m

Well yes - there has been some research on the use of touch screens in safety critical systems. For example: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49319450

That article is about controls on a military system. You make it sound as if people are steering their cars with touch controls, which they don't.

Screw overregulation, I do not want the government to assume that I am a complete idiot and regulate every single part of my life.

jvanderbot
0 replies
3h26m

I'm just quoting the article. TFA talks about not being able to find information on touch screens. The quoted portion talks about tactile controls. Both were a problem.

"Overregulation" is a squishy political term. We cancel each other out on this issue (assuming you're US-based). I'm not advocating for car controls to have regulations, but would be fine if they took sensible action. But they probably won't need to.

AutumnCurtain
2 replies
3h48m

I think he's pretty well analyzed it. Personally, I've had to drive a car full of toddlers with no heat in winter because my touch screen gave out and it was unsafe both to pull over and to try and troubleshoot while driving. This happened in a 2023 model year high end minivan. My 2009 mazda POS with physical knobs has never had a single problem in over an order of magnitude more time.

nxm
1 replies
3h37m

Climate control boards working off physical controls are known to go out as well.

2devnull
0 replies
3h32m

In a Mazda?

sdf4j
0 replies
3h49m

it’s not q “dumb invention” it’s a cost saving measure at the expense of injuring people.

ok123456
0 replies
3h26m

HCI people have been analyzing this problem since the 80s, and the consensus, outside of a few grifters who told Elon Musk what he wanted to hear, is that operating a complicated modal interface while driving is unsafe. It's not even safe to talk on the phone hands-free while driving.

hbn
0 replies
3h51m

You can ask anyone who uses them. Most people will say they feel like they're distracted and taking their eyes off the road while trying to navigate the UI on their touch screen, and the remaining people overestimate their multitasking abilities.

What is there you think needs proving? People can adjust the volume knob or AC without looking. You literally cannot do this with a touchscreen.

conductr
0 replies
3h27m

Let’s also not pretend this was a new invention and/or innovation. It was a (big) change to UX/UI of mass consumer heavy machinery, something that should absolutely require some due diligence and regulation should exist to ensure sufficient due diligence is taken proactively in cases precisely like this. The auto industry is quite used to navigating regulatory hurdles, I doubt this would have been a hindrance. It’s just a matter of requiring them to be proactive about it.

I think it also may not have mattered. We, as in contemporary humans, continue to devalue our attention/focus in regards to our technology. I think that’s the core problem with digital UI is they just requiring too much of our active attention where as physical knobs allow us to passively perform actions with muscle memory (low attention requirement)

If they took all the knobs and put some in the glove box and some inside the console and some in the back seat and so on… we wouldn’t consider that an invention. It would just be obvious that the knobs were difficult to access. That’s basically what they did but act like it’s fine because technically they’re still right there on the dash.

bedobi
0 replies
3h37m

Can we please first analyze the problem before we call for regulation

yes, let's prevent regulators from applying and enforcing no brainer life saving safety regulations without first being required to spend decades studying each individual issue and then litigate each individual issue for another couple of decades, ensuring that nothing ever gets regulated ever

because that's what you're asking for, whether you realize it or not

Erratic6576
0 replies
3h26m

How big should the corpse pile sein?

In summer 2017, the USS Fitzgerald collided with a container ship near the Japanese mainland in an accident that killed seven sailors. The McCain was off the coast of Singapore when it hit a container ship, killing 10 of the Navy destroyer's crew.

The report blames touch screens.

IMHO, car screens are useful to watch some telly or films during your boring commuting

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49319450

trizoza
7 replies
4h6m

Unfortunately is not only regulators, substitute all physical buttons with touchscreen is way cheaper and future proof, so all automakers were happy and quiet about it.

criley2
3 replies
4h4m

How is it future proof? Knobs work fine on 30 year old cars and can be 3d printed or ordered. I've never had a daily driver touch screen last longer than 5 years, personally.

It's planned obsolescence. Every part of the car should be good for 20 years. 20 years ago, we were using Moto Razrs and it would be 4 more years until iPhone changed how we think of touchscreens. These junk touchscreen cars from this era will not make it without extremely expensive repair

nucleardog
1 replies
3h58m

How is it future proof?

They’re infinitely modifiable in software.

If you’re doing a model refresh and want to add a button, you change a few lines of code instead of redesigning the dashboard and sourcing parts and adjusting the assembly process and updating the engineering documents and maintenance and repair manuals and…

gregmac
0 replies
3h43m

I suspect it's also a lot cheaper during model development. UI changes with physical buttons mean changing molds, screen-printed text, electrical connections, etc.

With a touchscreen, you plan "touchscreen here" and the UI can be modified in software basically up to the point the first production car rolls off the line (and even after that, too).

trizoza
0 replies
4h1m

You can just push a software update and completely change the functionality/looks of it. With the physical buttons, they have to be linked to a certain functionality at the manufacturing stage.

semireg
1 replies
3h54m

Let us not forget that keyboards are literally programmable buttons. Some with displays on each button. You can have software updates and physical buttons. This is a design issue, not an either or between touchscreens and “hardcoded single function buttons” of yesteryear.

jansan
0 replies
3h27m

It is a design issue because you cannot freely change the number, location and size of buttons. Also, buttons need to be planned long before mass production starts, and for smaller series it is quite expensive to have the mold and design created only for a specific car. That's why some buttons in super cars are shitty looking stock buttons.

With touch buttons or touch screens you only need to decide on the screen size and placement and everything can be done later in the development. It is quite an advantage from the car manufacturer's view.

ho_schi
0 replies
3h25m

Cars from thirty years ago still work. What makes them future proof is maintenance and engineering. Not touch screens.

We will always need to tune the temperature, switch turning indicators, turn on warning lights or change the volume.

Touch screens are only cheap. And it is questionable that we get any software update in ten years. Not even thinking three decades ahead.

And probably we will be glad that there are no software updates removing* or changing* features. With constant updates and internet connectivity we will not get any car safe.

Basically we want electric cars. Not computers, at least none we need to handle.

* e.g. Shimano Di2 (shifting groupset for roadbikes) with a Hammerhead bike computer: Shimano forced Hammerhead in 2022 to remove the support for the Di2 because Shimano now consider them as competitor. One of the reasons for mechanical groups is reliability! * Hello Windows Users. Do you like automatic updates? How about enforced updates? May we increase requirements?

Xelbair
7 replies
4h10m

Now if touch screens had a dynamic 3d surface that you could navigate blindly it would be something else.

It's not about touch nor physicality of a button or knob, but about a control that is not dependent on UI state

pif
2 replies
3h50m

It's not about touch

It's exactly about touch! The fundamental point is not needing to turn your eyes from the road.

lolinder
0 replies
3h38m

They should have said it's not just about touch. There are two components to not having to take your eyes off the road: first, you need to be able to find the controls. And second, you need to know exactly what the knob that you find will do when you change it.

A dynamic tactile touch screen solves the problem of finding the controls, but if the knob that you find could be the volume or the temperature depending on the mode the UI is in, you're still likely to look down to check which one it is.

Edit: And even some clever solution like giving different shapes to different modes doesn't help a ton, because that still uses more brain cycles and time than "reach for where I know the volume knob is and turn it left". You'd have to reach out and feel the control, and if it's the wrong one then reach for the mode switcher and then find the correct control. That's distracting regardless of whether the eyes can stay on the road, and you're very likely to pull your eyes down instinctively to help with that complicated process.

contravariant
0 replies
3h31m

I could do that with a touchscreen if I didn't need to look at it to know what was where.

There's two problems with this. Firstly it's generally unknowable what will appear where on the touschreen. Secondly even if you just want to know exactly where the touchscreen is then you need to look at it.

jvanderbot
1 replies
3h57m

Why not both?

Do you really believe that you can close your eyes and touch the "Start" button on a windows machine at arms length every time? Try it throughout your day. I doubt it.

The tactile feedback is important to know that you're making the adjustment you want, and to help you find the right control input.

argiopetech
0 replies
3h53m

Since my screen still has a bezel, there's a high likelihood, though perhaps not without spurious touches. Anything more than half an inch off that bezel? No chance.

We're both aging ourselves with "Start button", by the way.

mikrl
0 replies
3h30m

It's not about touch nor physicality of a button or knob, but about a control that is not dependent on UI state

No, I disagree.

The heterogeneity and tactile response of the UI is fundamental, at least for me.

Which quadrant of the display is the control in? You flick your eyes to check. Ok, now is my finger in the right place? You need to check again. Is it at the right level…

For the terminally space-brained like me, buttons and dials work much better. You flick your eyes and can see where the control is and in relation to what. Now you can trace with your finger to the area of the controller, and feel around to locate it in relation to the other controls. If it is ridged, you have tactile feedback on its orientation.

_ZeD_
0 replies
4h4m

it's both. I need to be able (and I am, on my parents' old fiat) to tune without leaving the eyes from the street. This means I can dedicate at most 5% of my brain and the touch feeling of one-maybe two-digit

intrasight
4 replies
4h10m

The regulators were indeed negligent. They either should've said no touchscreen controls period. Or said that the touchscreen needs to be disabled when the car is moving - with no override. I would've preferred the former. I think there's no place for a touchscreen in an automobile.

bluGill
1 replies
3h54m

The touch screen should be positioned such that the navigator can use it. If there is no navigator then the driver should have to pull over and stop to get at the screen. This also means all the controls currently on a touchscreen that the driver does need are moved to something physical.

I often and traveling with my wife, and get annoyed that I cannot some options because we are in motion - my wife is driving so there is nothing unsafe about me using the touchscreen. (when I drive I try to avoid looking at the infotainment - there is nothing on it that I need but it is still a distracting hazard)

sschueller
0 replies
3h27m

"Older" cars had screens that only the passenger could see while driving and the driver would see a blank screen.

planb
0 replies
3h54m

I feel quite confident skipping a few songs on CarPlay. If I needed to do this on my phone, it would be way more dangerous. Now of course not interacting with the media player at all would be safest, but we’re talking about humans here, so banning touch screens ins cars might do more harm than good.

OmarShehata
0 replies
3h49m

This seems like an extreme position that at best wastes everybody's time and doesn't improve anything (and is a good example of why being careful with regulation like this is very important).

Consider settings like: how long it takes for the car to shut off the lights automatically after you turn it off and lock it. Or other obscure things. You're not going to have physical buttons for that. You'd have a digital screen with next/previous/ok buttons. That isn't any better than using a touch screen to access those settings. Arguably worse UX.

Another posted suggested allow touch screens but have them not operate while car is in motion, with no override, and I think that's a much more targeted/palatable proposal with (maybe?) less unexpected consequences.

boringg
4 replies
3h53m

Can't eat while driving in Switzerland!? That's a ridiculous amount over regulation.

Joker_vD
3 replies
3h50m

Yeah, and you aren't allowed to drink while driving either. The oppression!

boringg
2 replies
3h37m

I have to assume you were trying to make a joke but have made the mistake of confusing drinking alcohol that impacts your mind with eating food that is a fuel for your body.

It was a valiant (/S) effort!

Joker_vD
1 replies
2h28m

You know, it's amazing how wildly different expectations people from different places have. Really highlights the completely arbitrary/social nature of most of our customs. One person thinks "why would you even consider eating while driving, this is so insane on so many levels I don't even know where to start enumerating them" while another thinks "of course I should be allowed to eat while driving, that's one of the most natural things".

A couple of days ago there was an article on HN about the littering behaviour and causes of it. As some commenters noticed, the main reason is simply that people do whatever the hell they feel like doing, without much consideration. Driving and suddenly feel hungry? Eat something right now. There is a wrapper paper in one of your hands now and it's inconvenient to hold it while eating and driving? Throw it out of the window. Etc.

And yes, I've seen debaters on the Internet arguing for allowing DUI, for non-requirement of seat belts, for allowing smoking in public places etc, basically for anything that mildly inconveniences a person for a vague personal and/or public benefit. And on HN too, about a year or so ago?

P.S. About "eating food that is a fuel for your body" — there's a fancy term "postprandial somnolence" for that feeling of drowsiness after a meal. Definitely something you'd like to experience while driving (/S).

boringg
0 replies
1h47m

I'm guessing you live in a place where you don't actually travel that far or has significant mass transit options available to you. Most likely a country in the EU (aka very small distances). You should come visit North America and try and understand how different rural North America is compared to anywhere the EU.

I would argue that the customs and expectations from different places arise from the different needs in those communities and/or the level of regulation that is tolerated from the people. Switzerland has a lot of winding mountain roads - so likely need two hands on the wheel at all times whereas North America has a lot of flat straight roads where it is quite reasonable to drive with one hand on the wheel for short periods of time. Also Tesla auto-pilot helps out.

Additionally I suspect that you argue so strongly in favor of no eating in your car makes me think that you live in a state with very strong control of your population and it is well tolerated by the population - with assumed upside benefits as a result.

DeepSeaTortoise
4 replies
4h11m

Chances are the number of accidents caused by the lack of physical buttons is quite low.

Same reason why (in absence of extreme environmental conditions) difficult climbing routes are considered quite safe: Because people are aware of the danger in the specific situation.

Doesn't eliminate the need for safe design, tho, attaching giant spinning metal blades to dashboards might solve many problems, but few in favor of the driver.

trizoza
1 replies
4h3m

Untrue, the top car accident factor at 38% of all car accidents in the UK is "Driver or rider not looking properly" - how many of these are drivers interacting with the built-in touchscreen isn't clear, but it's definitely part of it.

konschubert
0 replies
3h57m

Most will have been people on their phone. In fact, I would suspect that number to be much higher. Since people lie about being on the phone.

hluska
0 replies
3h6m

Somewhat off topic, but if you climb the best advice I can give is to look at every single route as being extremely dangerous. That attitude of constant danger will keep you alive. There’s a saying in SAR communities - they pull the best climbers’ bodies off of the easiest routes.

The attitude of constant danger will even protect you from another weird climbing stat. Having avalanche survival/safety courses increases the probability that you will die in an avalanche. One of the people who taught me how to ice climb died in an avalanche. We don’t want more dead climbers.

heavyset_go
0 replies
4h6m

Same reason why (in absence of extreme environmental conditions) difficult climbing routes are considered quite safe: Because people are aware of the danger in the specific situation.

If this were applicable to drivers made up of the general public, we wouldn't have a glut of accidents caused by people using their phones while driving.

londons_explore
3 replies
4h5m

Might be worth blocking all controls, touchscreen or not, while the car is in motion.

If you need to turn on the defroster, pull over, turn on the defroster, and pull away again.

nucleardog
0 replies
3h52m

That sounds awful. When you’re in lane 3/6 on a highway doing 85mph… “oh shit my window is starting to fog up, lemme try and navigate my way to the shoulder with my quickly diminishing visibility so I can press a button then try and merge into a busy highway from a standstill”.

Just design the vehicle better. I can see the status of my HVAC without taking my eyes off of the road—it’s on a display mounted on top of my dash, forward toward the windshield—and turn on defrost mode with the press of a single, large physical button inset inside a large knob which provides a clear touch cue.[0] I have never had to take my eyes off the road to adjust any of this system.

[0] https://assets.bpwalters.com/images/bens_car_blog/10k_review...

bluGill
0 replies
3h36m

You picked a bad example. Defroster is one of the safety critical controls you need to be able to turn on now. More than once I've crossed a weather front while driving and the outside humidity and temperature have both changed drastically causing an instant need of change to the HVAC for safety reasons.

The radio should only have minimal accessible controls while driving. However even then remember that the non-driver should get the ability to have more control.

amonavis
0 replies
3h59m

I can think of many scenarios in which this can be actually dangerous. Not all roads in the world have a side lane in which you can stop at any time. Driving with a foggy windshield waiting to find the proper lane can be very dangerous.

dax_
3 replies
4h17m

I agree that there should be physical buttons, however in most of these cars you can use voice input for adjusting AC as well. I've been using that all the time, it works, and I don't have to take my eyes off the road.

silversmith
0 replies
3h33m

I have a car with voice controls. That don't work if the overall UI is set to Latvian. And struggles with my accent when set to English. The climate control knobs have no problems with my language skills tho.

kyriakos
0 replies
3h34m

I do the same, found its the quickest way and you don't need to take your eyes off the road and your hands off the wheel.

gilbetron
0 replies
4h8m

Many people, myself included, can't talk and do things at the same time. Talking is far more distracting to me than pushing a physical button. It actually takes more brain power to talk than to navigate a screen interface, but the screen interface is still worse because I have to take my eyes off the road, but talking is a close second. If I'm in a high-interaction driving environment (ie not an express way with low traffic), I will literally, unconsciously slow down if you ask me a complex question. I think there is some gender asymmetry to this issue, as my wife, and all the women I regularly drive with, can talk and do things at the same time.

rgrieselhuber
1 replies
3h56m

On a personal level, I think of this trend toward making everything detached from physicality as digital Gnosticism. But context is also important. On a phone or tablet where you want ultimate flexibility from the device, touchscreens make sense. In a vehicle, you want each button / switch to do one thing with an immediate and direct impact on physical reality.

_fat_santa
0 replies
3h52m

I wonder why we do not yet have a hybrid to physical buttons and a touch screen. How I see it, you have a dashboard that has your main touchscreen but also has several buttons and knobs that are "blank", when you setup your vehicle you can decide what actions these buttons perform and they have a small screen on the front to tell you what they do at any given time.

dukeofdoom
1 replies
3h34m

The cybertruck doesn't have door handles. You press a button, then the door pops a little, and you put your hand on the door frame where the door closes. Slick design, until you slam your fingers, or it freezes.

bryanlarsen
0 replies
3h26m

The cybertruck door has been tested with an inch of ice and still opens. I once broke my door handle on my Mazda trying to get it open with much less than that.

teeray
0 replies
3h34m

I think it was Audi that had an interesting compromise: a screen with a haptic joystick in the center console. Using this joystick was a bit more like sliding a puck around that would “stick” in certain places (to highlight UI elements). I don’t think it’s a total solution, since the UI was still stateful, and it required looking at the screen to determine that state, but it did nicely handle the feedback portion.

onli
0 replies
3h42m

VW might actually make this move because of regulatory pressure. There was a recent decision of not allowing the use of Tesla's touch screens in Germany [0]. So if VW had continued with their touchscreen-only design they might have gotten issues in their home country.

That this hasn't happened yet might be because automotive regulation is in general a joke in this country, as the car companies run the economy and thus have strong influence government. But the pressure was building. Plus the customers hating the touch screens, as the article is saying, that will have been a small factor.

[0]: https://www.adac.de/verkehr/recht/verkehrsvorschriften-deuts...

amelius
0 replies
4h16m

Now if touch screens had a dynamic 3d surface that you could navigate blindly it would be something else.

Unless your hand got caught in that 3d surface.

1970-01-01
0 replies
3h27m

How many people died (this includes pedestrians) because someone tried to adjust their AC in a multi level menu touch screen?

It's not clear. Does statistically normalized data show more or less death when buttons and levers were the only way to adjust temperature?

taimurkazmi
50 replies
5h14m

I'm not sure why car manufacturers thought it's a good idea to have essential controls on a touchpad you have to look at to navigate. I mean, shouldn't you be looking at something else when controlling a vehicle?

tokai
15 replies
5h7m

Price. Its one operation to install a touch monitor. While its Y operations for Y number of buttons.

Vespasian
4 replies
5h1m

And cabling for each of them.

At least: Y * (1 cable + 2 plugs + 1 port at the controller + clips).

Wire Harnesses for modern cars are seriously complicated affairs[0]. And even using more modern variants they still need to be installed manually.

[0] https://www.carscoops.com/2022/05/carmakers-are-rushing-to-a...

malermeister
2 replies
4h48m

Why is Zigbee or similar not an option there? I have a whole bunch of physical controls all around my house without running a single wire, why can't car manufacturers do the same?

kubik369
1 replies
4h42m

Think about it a bit more. You still need wires for power, you can’t be swapping batteries in car accessories as you can in your home. If you are already running wires for power, running 1-2 more for data is not that problematic, you are already running the harness. In addition, you don’t want the latency and unreliability of wireless solutions in a car. It might be ok in your home, but not in a pretty rough environment such as your car. It would also be much more expensive both hardware and software wise, not even mentioning the potential bugs and such.

Vespasian
0 replies
4h31m

Exactly. The HW is pretty cheap but no HW is cheaper.

It has a ripple effect for other parts.

Button for everybody: More expensive and can't be sold as a package

Button optional: No Button -> Hole in plastic molded cover -> Either need different molds/parts or an additional preparation step removing the plastic covering the hole. Car manufacturing is traditionally very low margin business and extremely streamlined. Sooner or later EVs will also end up in the same situation

synecdoche
0 replies
4h6m

No need for wiring from the controller. A distributed IO breakout box at each cluster site, with CAN communication in between, would suffice.

bradfa
3 replies
4h35m

This! At a previous job we moved all our less expensive products to capacitive touch buttons and resistive touch screens because it's tremendously cheaper than physical buttons.

Cap touch buttons or physical buttons both require a circuit board, so that costs the same, but cap touch buttons just need one big sheet of material with some screen printing placed over the circuit board. Physical clicky buttons require each button to be designed, manufactured, screen printed, and the clicky action to be tuned for feel and durability, none of which is cheap. Physical buttons may not all be exactly the same size and shape due to design considerations, so that's injection mold tooling variations, additional supply chain part numbers to manage, and additional ways that manufacturing can screw up assembly. Physical buttons can jam, get stuck, or fall out, so engineering time needs to be spent ensuring this won't happen 10 years from now, too.

coldpie
2 replies
4h14m

At a previous job we moved all our less expensive products to capacitive touch buttons and resistive touch screens because it's tremendously cheaper than physical buttons.

I hate whoever was responsible this decision. After Internet connectivity, this is the 2nd worst trend in modern electronics.

ta1243
0 replies
3h58m

Spend $40k on a new car, but they've saved a few bucks on some real buttons.

I'm sure someone made the decision and said "I've just saved $10m by slashing our BOM by $50".

ricardobayes
0 replies
3h51m

No love for a wifi-connected vacuum cleaner?

dagw
2 replies
4h54m

Yet as a general rule, the cheaper a car is the more buttons it has.

tokai
1 replies
4h50m

Because the cheap car has an old and unmodernized production line.

prmoustache
0 replies
3h4m

I don't think that is the reason.

Cheap cars simply have less feature while expensive ones have tons of features + associated settings.

smrq
0 replies
3h25m

I hate how I have to plug in all 104 wires to make my keyboard work.

simondotau
0 replies
4h46m

My parents have a 2019 Subaru Forester and it has too many buttons. It also has too many screens each with their own settings menu. Which goes to show that the battle isn’t really between buttons vs screens, but rather good UX vs bad UX.

freetanga
0 replies
4h46m

But the monitor can range in price - the more features you put in it, the better (pricier) it should be, specially vs cheaper buttons.

To serve a level of functionality, you have a curve described as

PriceOfMonitor(MonitorQuality) + X * PriceofCheapButtons

metafunctor
11 replies
4h54m

Not sure what you mean, actually. Navigate? You mean pressing the microphone button and saying "Let's go home", or some other kind of navigation?

Route planning typically happens when stationary — or if you have passengers, they'll obviously use the systems onboard (or on their personal devices) to do navigation.

But if you're driving alone, and no-one else is navigating for you… you'll have to stop.

Marazan
5 replies
4h38m

As in navigate the menu system.

metafunctor
4 replies
3h59m

If it would come to that, I would just not do it. It would be a peripheral activity anyway, if it's not afforded by my steering wheel or voice controls. So, yes, I would stop to navigate that. Not sure what that would be, in your car? In my car that might be something like planning the charging for the next night, or unexpectedly running out of battery and planning a detour? Very rare.

HPsquared
3 replies
3h50m

Depending on the road, you might have to wait 10+ minutes before there is anywhere to stop.

metafunctor
2 replies
3h35m

To stop for charging?

HPsquared
1 replies
3h33m

Stopping for food, say. You're on the road in unfamiliar territory, it's lunch time, you need to eat. What do?

metafunctor
0 replies
3h23m

Umm. Stop, eat, charge, visit the restroom… what exactly is the problem you envisioning?

replygirl
1 replies
4h32m

...unless you have physical inputs, in which case you just have two or three glances at the screen, each quicker than the mirror check i know you're doing every few seconds.

the problem isn't that you're doing something with your free hand and sparing some mental capacity--else the manual transmission would be outlawed--it's that if you have a poorly designed car, you have to look away for long enough to lose track of what's happening around you.

good on you for realizing when you can't safely operate your car. but me, i just bought a car i can operate safely.

metafunctor
0 replies
3h51m

It seems I don't understand what you're talking about. Sorry! I must have been very unclear in my parent post...

What makes you believe I think I can't safely operate my car? I don't know what “mirror checks” you mean?

aacid
1 replies
4h36m

changing climate controls, changing radio station, changing driving modes.

metafunctor
0 replies
4h2m

I can do those all without taking my eyes off the road. Not sure what you mean?

EliRivers
0 replies
4h33m

you'll have to stop.

I understand a lot of people don't and this significantly increases the rate of vehicle collisions and other accidents.

simondotau
8 replies
4h53m

And that’s a tolerable outcome if the UX is responsive and well designed. Tesla can just barely get away with their approach because the software is sufficiently good.

Unfortunately most legacy auto seem to have hired their talent directly from printer manufacturers like Canon and Epson. So blindly copying Tesla isn’t going to turn out quite so well for them.

hef19898
4 replies
4h45m

Tesla gets away with it because almost everyone esle followed them to save costs. And because they managed to convince people to cope with that shit in first place (cars are now software because of EV and reasons and all that crap).

rightbyte
1 replies
4h37m

(cars are now software because of EV and reasons and all that crap)

Ye EVs could potentially have less software than ICEs. Simpler motor ECU and often no gearbox or clutch.

Instead the manufacturers take the opportunity to push more stuff on us.

Haemm0r
0 replies
4h0m

I really doubt that the FC firmware of an EV is less comolex than the software of an ice control unit.

1980phipsi
1 replies
4h28m

It's simple: don't buy cars with shitty UX.

hef19898
0 replies
4h24m

Obviously! As with AI powered smartphones and internet connected household devices, this gets harder and harder.

That being said, I like the UX of our cars. But the newest ine is from 2020, the oldest one from 1982...

danielvaughn
2 replies
4h20m

I really don't get why vehicle manufacturers skimp on software - it's a super competitive and massive industry, and the consequences of failure are high. If they paid SV-level salaries, they'd get SV-level talent.

hef19898
1 replies
4h6m

SV-talent that then figures out ways to monetize the ads shown to you in the HUD while driving? Sorry, couldn't help it.

ta1243
0 replies
4h1m

Sorry, couldn't help it.

The SV motto

rurounijones
4 replies
5h12m

Touch screens are cheap and allow for post-release UI modifications.

hef19898
2 replies
4h40m

Automotive grade, smart touch screens are not that cheap. And all the do is allowing for lazy development and the release of pre-Beta software if used the way they currently are.

ajross
1 replies
4h37m

Automotive grade, smart touch screens are not that cheap.

Oh, come on. It's a laptop panel. It's not "smart", it's just the same display/touchscreen component you can find for $150 on Alibaba or whatever.

hef19898
0 replies
4h34m

It is decidedly not. First, the environmental conditions, heat, cold, vibrations, sun (just ask Tesla how those cheap non-automotive grade screen did). Second, if the screen is just used to capture input and display atuff, sure it is stupid. A lot aren't so as they include some computing power.

But hey, good luck sourcing your parts for serial car manufacture, or anything even remotely serious in a commercial environment, from Alibaba... What's your alternate source of choice, Wish or Temu?

Maakuth
0 replies
5h8m

This VW solution really is worst of both worlds, as these are capacitive surfaces with printed symbols. So you cannot really iterate on them post-release.

yreg
3 replies
5h9m

The motivation is the same as what Steve claimed in the 2007 iPhone keynote – you have to reuse the buttons you put in the device for all interaction and that makes it clunky. And if you get a great new idea after you ship the product, then tough luck, you cannot change the buttons anymore.

I personally drive a Model 3 and would appreciate to have a few more physical buttons though. (But it's not a bug deal for me.)

smolder
0 replies
4h2m

If you actually have a great new idea, you can put it in the next model of car. Updating cars shouldn't go beyond navigation data.

hliyan
0 replies
4h49m

I used to drive a Nissan Juke that I felt had the best of both worlds: a regular screen with a physical dial and buttons that change function based on the context displayed on screen (e.g. AC, drive mode). The buttons even had little screens on then so that they could display the function label.

b3kart
0 replies
5h3m

But it's not a bug deal for me.

Did you type this on a touchscreen? ;-)

kristopolous
2 replies
4h7m

Because Tesla did it and the market blindly slovenly and stupidly follows leaders regardless of their sanity.

See also how every laptop is becoming a MacBook and every phone is becoming an iphone. Non removable batteries, touch screen car interfaces, soldered in memory, removal of things like headphone jacks ... Competitors fall over themselves trying to follow any design signal they see.

You can disagree but you really ought to be evidence based and not just vibes.

sixQuarks
1 replies
3h41m

Tesla did it prematurely because Musk was convinced FSD was close to being solved, and thus paying attention to the road wasn’t important.

People tolerated it so there is no pressure for them to change.

kristopolous
0 replies
1h45m

Tesla did it to differentiate themselves in the marketplace and they thought it looked sexy.

To demonstrate the validity of this response, you can apply it generally to a wide variety of things they do.

The variations on the doors, all of them, the model release order being S3 X Y, it's kind of all over the place. Their logo even looks like uterus (https://twitter.com/Jam_0s/status/1531368537847214080).

They're obsessed with differentiation for the sake of it. Look at the cybertruck. It's a company run by a middle aged man with hair plugs, 3 wives and 11 children who bought a 44 billion dollar company as a vanity project.

rsynnott
0 replies
4h42m

They thought it was a way to save money, but they really seem to have underestimated how much it would annoy people.

metafunctor
38 replies
4h57m

I absolute prefer proper physical interfaces for the most commonly used things. Like steering, acceleration, breaking, blinking, volume control, door handles, wipers, that sort of things. These are things I would use almost every drive.

However, I would prefer to plan my navigation, browse settings, configure the car, and peruse statistics on a nice snappy capacitive display UI. Please do keep/build that.

sigmoid10
19 replies
4h52m

It's really simple: Anything that needs adjustment during driving should be a physical button so I can interact with it without looking away from the road. Especially basic climate and media controls have no business in cascaded touchscreen menus and these things probably have caused countless accidents.

metafunctor
10 replies
4h42m

I've been driving a new Tesla for the past months, and the on-screen climate and media controls actually don't bother me much at all. Granted, it's not actually a cascaded menu, so maybe I'm not really responding to your argument at all. Which car does have climate controls hidden in a cascaded menu, and not available more easily?

In a Tesla, these things are in a predictable place physically and the controls respond quite nicely. I can use the scroll buttons and other buttons on the yoke to control these and various other things without taking my eyes off the traffic. There's even good voice control for things like navigation (“take me home”).

However, I've encountered some challenges with the blinker controls, particularly when the yoke isn't upright. I've gotten more accustomed to their placement and can usually find the right spot instinctively, but occasionally, they either don't respond or I press the wrong area. It's a minor but noticeable annoyance. I'm thinking about adding tactile stickers to the wheel to help identify these spots more easily.

zelos
5 replies
4h7m

However, I've encountered some challenges with the blinker controls, particularly when the yoke isn't upright.

The blinker control placement confused me: how do you change the indicator direction when turning off a roundabout? With a stalk it's just a press down with your little finger, but surely with buttons that move with the wheel it's harder?

Or is the yoke on a Tesla so sensitive that you don't turn it far enough round for it to be an issue?

jsight
4 replies
3h54m

Or is the yoke on a Tesla so sensitive that you don't turn it far enough round for it to be an issue?

That seems to be the intended direction longer term. Cybertruck is designed with drive by wire and very sensitive steering at low speed. I have some doubts about it, but if it works well, it may eventually end up in the other cars too.

metafunctor
3 replies
3h48m

Hah, that is definitely not the short term result.

The yoke is upside down every drive for me. Just getting out of the driveway it's going to be upside down.

The yoke is fine doing extreme turns, my hands find it and I can turn it all ways very quickly multiple turns. I'm not concerned of “extreme situations” or anything like that.

But when I want to "blink right" it's a real fucking problem to figure out where exactly on the yoke I should exert sufficient pressure. Unless the yoke is upright and I'm “holding it right”; as it were :)

natch
1 replies
3h22m

I guess this only affects you if want to signal after you’re already in a turn?

metafunctor
0 replies
2h33m

Like when exiting a roundabout? I have at least one almost everywhere I go…

jsight
0 replies
2h59m

It is like everything else with Tesla. They add the wrong part of the solution first.

Hey, we have this new vision based TACC! But first... we remove the radar, then later we'll make that actually work. Get used to phantom braking and limited features in the mean time.

The CT drive by wire approach should solve your problems, but it remains to be seen if it actually works well. The reviewers so far haven't really gone in depth on its feel.

amluto
2 replies
3h23m

On a Tesla S, the media controls are not in a predictable place, and the climate controls need a menu for anything other than a temperature change.

metafunctor
1 replies
3h16m

This is, in my experience, incorrect.

Driving a recent Model S.

Selecting the temperature can be done on the wheel, or with a single press on the screen in a predictable spot.

Same with media: play, stop, volume, next, previous.

Other adjustments, yes, those may need a modal interaction. Much like physical dials. I would slightly prefer physical dials, but not something I would need to adjust during drives almost ever, so I don’t see a problem here.

amluto
0 replies
2h14m

I don’t know about recent ones, but in old ones you need to long press the wheel to get a menu to select what it controls, then select a mode, then adjust the temp.

And the media controls are a mess that changes periodically with updates.

natch
0 replies
3h17m

For others reading, most Teslas have traditional stalks still; the yoke issues mentioned are in Model S, Model X, and Cybertruck.

And maybe less of an issue in Cybertruck with steer by wire.

ajross
5 replies
4h39m

Out of curiosity, which car are you thinking about that places climate and media controls in a cascaded menu? I don't think this happens. In a Tesla, for example, volume/play/pause/skip/back are all on the left thumbwheel and the climate temperature is fixed at the bottom left of the screen in all UI modes (well, you can hide it with a game/video, but not while driving).

I worry HN has gotten itself into an "alternate facts" mode again with this subject, where the hyperbole has led people to assume facts that don't exist. The real world is always more boring than the most upvoted comment.

scarab92
2 replies
4h9m

Are you able to adjust the temperature without looking at the screen?

Being a flat pane of glass, I would worry that you need to use hand-eye coordination to locate the button, whereas with a physical button you can feel for it without looking.

natch
0 replies
3h14m

I usually adjust the climate five minutes before getting to my car.

enlightenedfool
0 replies
3h13m

Press the right knob once and issue voice command. That’s it.

phito
0 replies
3h54m

My new Peugeot has climate control on the touch screen, and I have to click a menu button to access it

nottorp
0 replies
3h11m

Which Tesla are you talking about? In the one I've driven (mind, just once and never again thank you) I couldn't find the temperature controls on that stupid tablet.

And even if it's always visible on the touch screen while driving, I still need to look at the touch screen right?

My main use case for climate controls is turning recirculation on/off when i come up behind a clunker where there's no space to overtake and need to recirculate so I don't suffocate. That is not a good time to take your eyes off the road, except maybe if you're Elon Musk.

Also, on the one Tesla I've driven i couldn't understand how the turn stalk (it still had a physical turn stalk, I believe Musk has apologized for not removing that one physical control from the car) worked. It only signaled while i was holding it when i wanted it to stay signaling and the reverse. Useless in any intersection that's not at 90 degrees. Designed in California :)

hef19898
0 replies
4h11m

Jaguar does that, at least in the latest XE (which stole the screens and such from the iPace if I am not mistaken):

- climate control, driving modes, gearbox etc... are all physical buttons. As is entertainment if you count the steering wheel buttons.

- radio, navigation phone and some other non essentials are touch screens (there are two of those)

- car parameters and display are controlled by buttons on the steering wheel and displayed at the display unit

As it should be. Only thing I miss is buttons for the touch screen controls, but then the screen is reactive enough, even with gloves, so it is not really an issue.

ametrau
0 replies
3h58m

100%. How is this not basic common sense. How did we get to this point?

2devnull
10 replies
4h28m

I won’t own a car with a touchscreen. Ever. If I were given such a vehicle, I would get rid of it quickly.

My last car purchase it was not easy to find a newer vehicle without that junk. I see such things as signs of low quality. I don’t want to spend thousands of dollars on anything connected to some cheap Chinese touch pad. It ruins the entire experience.

If I wanted navigation I’d use my phone. Any car I have to configure, I will loath deeply.

danielvaughn
3 replies
4h23m

Have you ever driven a Tesla? I drove one last year and literally all you get is a touch screen. IIRC you even use the touch screen to change gears. It's insane. I did get used to it, but overall I absolutely loathe touch screens in vehicles. If I can't modify something without averting my eyes from the road, then I consider it a massive safety hazard. I'll never understand how regulators approved these things.

natch
1 replies
2h45m

literally all you get is a touch screen

There were no buttons on the steering wheel? Which model?

you even use the touch screen to change gears.

Wow, really wondering now which Tesla model did you drive, where you had to change gears?

danielvaughn
0 replies
2h12m

I can't remember which model, by "gears" I mean reverse, neutral, drive, etc.

2devnull
0 replies
3h49m

No. I don’t have a lot of money, and am skeptical they or other shiny new tech toys can save the planet via consumerism. I’m pro-Tesla on net. Everyone in the upper middle class were buying Lexus’ and Suburbans before Tesla came along, so I imagine many thousands of tons less pollution than the counter-factual. But probably buying a brand new Tesla isn’t cooling the atmosphere appreciably. In any case, I’m not that counter-factual. To the extent I like cars, and I kind of do, I like those with character and manual gears. I try to limit my driving, but when I have to drive, I enjoy the full experience.

ta1243
2 replies
4h3m

I have two cars. One is a 2005 Micra with no touch screen. Doing things like changing the clock is a right pain. The other is a 2021 Skoda with a touch screen, I can change the clock far more easily. The Skoda also does things like monitoring tyre pressure and warning if I get a puncture, and some other things deep in the menu I use once or twice a year (I find changing settings to km/h instead of mph is handy when going to europe)

The car with a touch screen has buttons to select between volume, radio and carplay and works fine. Cruise/Limit is a button on the steering wheel, and there's a roller for volume, changing tracks, etc.

Heating/aircon/defroster is a dial/physical buttons in both cars, same with things like hazzard lights, internal lights etc. Handbrake is a real handle, not a random button you hope is working.

There is no need to touch the touchscreen while driving, but having a map there is quite handy, certainly better than a phone in a cradle on the dashboard.

Just because a car has a touch screen doesn't mean you need to use it to operate basic functions. The problem isn't the screen, it's the lack of buttons for operational functions.

bluGill
0 replies
3h24m

In the US all cars starting in 2007 must monitor tire pressure by law. That your 2005 car doesn't while your 2021 does isn't a touch screen function it is they didn't add that feature. Cars from before the touch screen era also told you tire pressure.

Judging by the cars you name I'm guessing you are not in the US, I don't know what your local laws are. Probably similar but different years and other minor differences.

2devnull
0 replies
3h36m

Very persuasive when stated that way! It’s a good question. Why not just allow this small added feature which you don’t have to use?

That’s a great general question that can be asked in many places that software dwells. My answer and thinking is therefore general as well. It’s a trap. What would the great Stallman say about touchscreens in the cockpit? He would be correct too. It’s a Trojan horse, once they get the touchscreen there it’s a matter of years before driving involves watching ads to offset fuel tax costs or whatever else the leadersip has decided the world must do now.

metafunctor
2 replies
4h6m

Would you own a car that has an associated app for a phone or tablet?

The app would do things like planning trips, showing mileage statistics, giving you verbose errors in case the vehicle has issues, and for an EV you could plan and control charging for off-peak times, etc.

If you would like that, why wouldn't you like the same in the car itself? Those are not things you would need to use while driving, of course, but it would still be quite a bit nicer that going to "stats menu 001" "L" "2" "11" and viewing a number on some LCD readout...

the_snooze
1 replies
3h32m

Cars have functional lives of 10+ years, and very often longer than that. The way nearly all car apps are implemented is that they depend on some remote backend. What you're describing sounds good on the surface, but car manufacturers have absolutely no incentive to keep that software up-to-date, functional, and secure for the functional life of the car.

The LCD readout doesn't require long-term software maintenance, because it's entirely local and just works regardless of who's in charge at the car company.

nottorp
0 replies
3h9m

have absolutely no incentive to keep that software up-to-date, functional, and secure for the functional life of the car

They do. It will just be free for the first 3 years, 20/month next 3 years... up to 500/month for collector's items :)

YetAnotherNick
6 replies
4h46m

Agreed for others but I don't think you have driven a car with physical steering if you think they are good.

smolder
2 replies
4h24m

Maybe you didn't know, but on the vast majority of cars there is a physical link so if power assist fails, you are still turning the tires. But as someone who drove a Toyota pickup around with completely manual steering, I'd say it's only really bad at low speeds, where it's a bit of an arm workout.

bluGill
0 replies
3h21m

There are many ways to do steering. Until the 1950s nobody had power steering and didn't miss it. However in the 1960s they decided different steering linkages were better, but the new ones needed power steering - you could steer without but it was "strong man" territory.

YetAnotherNick
0 replies
3h26m

I know that, but OP said they "prefer proper physical interface" not something that they just want for safety. My preference is physical for everything else like windshield etc. but power assist is too convenient to not want that.

metafunctor
1 replies
4h26m

A long time ago, I was a kart racing enthusiast, so I've always appreciated the direct, visible connection between the steering wheel and the wheels. It offers a tangible, physical sense of control. Not sure what Tesla did with the Model S, but it almost feels like a kart car in this sense. The steering responds immediately, and I can “feel” the road. I obviously don't see the front wheels, but still I know exactly how they lay at all times.

kaptainscarlet
0 replies
4h12m

They tend to compensate for that lack of physical connect using complicated force feedback systems these days.

actionfromafar
0 replies
4h34m

I don't think "without power assist" was the intention.

javier_e06
16 replies
4h38m

The dashboard test: Arrive from a long flight at night at the airport, get a car rental, attempt to operate the buttons to enter the gps address of the hotel and turn on the headlights on before exiting the parking lot. The last time, my 2020 Lexus SUV insisted that I needed to download the Lexus App to my phone before I could access navigation tools in the dashboard. This was a luxury car for chris sake. Cars today are victims of the Nokia feature curse. A bunch of features (calendar, reminders ) that nobody used during the flip-phone era. But you had to have the darn feature in order to compete weather people use it or not.

ta1243
7 replies
4h12m

The car has carplay (or androidauto), apple/google/whatever maps will take me where I want to go, same as it does in any car.

If the car didn't have car play I'd refuse to take it as it's clearly faulty. I can't remember the last time I had a rental car without those features.

mleo
4 replies
4h2m

And best if connecting the system to CarPlay is straightforward. We have a Jeep rental while car is getting repaired. It took looking up online and digging through several levels of ui to get the system to connect to the phone. While this is generally a once every year or two, for fleet sales, it is painful.

ta1243
3 replies
3h41m

I've almost always had a

plug in usb

press "ok"

method, no matter what the manufacturer.

Sometimes I have to press the "carplay" icon on the screen, but it's quite rare

The bigger problem is that some cars are USB-C and some are USB-A. I have both cables in my bag though.

I don't bother with wireless car play as my phone always needs charging anyway.

ghaff
2 replies
3h25m

but it's quite rare

I have to select CarPlay on the Honda I bought last year so it can't be that rare.

javier_e06
1 replies
2h21m

I have a Hyundai Santa Fe. It pairs my Android Phone as soon as the car starts and the Google Maps pops on the screen. Zero fumbling. Except when a member of the family Iphone is nearby. Then the Iphone bullies my Android and pairs first.

ghaff
0 replies
1h58m

My Honda actually has wireless charging for my iPhone but I have to plug it in for CarPlay so I basically never use the wireless charging.

wilde
1 replies
3h50m

You're about to have a lot more of them, since GM is ditching both. https://www.motortrend.com/news/general-motors-removing-appl...

phpisthebest
0 replies
3h11m

I cant remember the last time I got a GM Rental... Normally it is Chrysler or Toyota I see

lotsofpulp
7 replies
4h17m

This test is now does the car have a screen compatible with CarPlay/Android Auto. I don’t ever want to be entering an address into a car’s infotainment again.

sorum
5 replies
4h12m

How GM thinks removing CarPlay and Android Auto is a strategically beneficial move, is mind boggling. I literally can't imagine how the reasoning happened, except for some really strong-willed exec with a lot of political power pushed it through.

Can't wait for the post-mortem analysis in 10 years.

bluGill
3 replies
3h27m

The terms to car makers for this stuff isn't always nice to car makers. I'm under NDA here so I can't say more.

phpisthebest
0 replies
3h6m

Yes because the phone companies do not allow the car makers to spy on me, which they should not be doing anyway..

Sorry that is not something i am going to cry for GM over

lotsofpulp
0 replies
3h16m

Not my problem. And if the terms are so bad, then car makers have a simple solution. Make it easy to swap in a CarPlay compatible third party headunit.

ghaff
0 replies
3h23m

That may be true but it's close to a dealbreaker for me and presumably a lot of other people. Not that I'd probably buy a GM vehicle anyway.

itomato
0 replies
3h42m

Instead of working with their software vendor, some VP took their edge case for battery and charge integration as a reason to commit seppuku.

avisser
0 replies
3h22m

Agreed. At this point, if I need GPS, I've probably looked at the map before I get in the car. Love that when I start Google Maps in on CarPlay, the first thing it asks is if I want to navigate to PLACE_I_JUST_SEARCHED_FOR. Hell yeah I do.

alkonaut
16 replies
4h52m

The design in the pic looks reasonable. Big screen for nav, setup, rarely used functions. Then a set buttons with a knob for volume (or other rotary control when in setup mode on the screen) and buttons around it to provide just the minimum functions you need while driving such as defrosters and climate control.

You really don't need a lot of physical buttons for a car UX to be safe. And each button shouldn't need a separate cable. That button pad can be the exact sam N buttons for every model, every trim, and regardless of which side the steering wheel is on. The design with "flying" screens in front of the dashboard feels modern but it's of course a cost saving, which can be copied for the button pads. And use a single cable to the button console. I can't see how it's a massive production headache or cost if it's built that way.

It's not 1989 you don't need 2 wires per button and 9 buttons for favorite radio stations.

jollyllama
7 replies
4h9m

From what I understand, even ICE cars have more wiring than ever.

tinco
6 replies
3h45m

I think it's a reference to something Elon Musk recently said about the 48 volt system in the Cybertruck. Apparently switching to 48v allows them to use ethernet in the car and save 77% on wiring.

I'm not sure why 48V specifically makes this feasible, though it definitely makes it more efficient (and lighter). I watched a video on it a couple weeks ago and it made sense to me then, now I'm not sure why you couldn't make a 12V network. Maybe it's just more expensive.

Apparently the Cybertruck is the only or one of the very few cars that have done this.

bluGill
1 replies
3h31m

48V isn't what enables Ethernet, it does however make it more useful. 48V enables high power things to be scattered around the car - voltage loss from the front to the back of a car at 12V is an issue, and cars spend a lot of money on large wires to work around that.

High power things scattered around the car often can take advantage of Ethernet. things that cannot get a lot of power can get by on lower bandwidth data buses.

bbarn
0 replies
3h11m

The 12V loss is something that really sunk in working on older cars. You wouldn't think a cable that read 0 on the ohmeter could still not sufficiently carry power, but it happens. Starter systems especially - My old van I remember wouldn't start once and all I had to do was clean the terminals on the battery with a wire brush.

karolist
0 replies
3h25m

BMW started using fiber optic cables in their cars in 2003 (with the introduction of 5 series E60) for CAN comms between modules, the reason was that in case of side crash the repair costs were super high to reconnect a baseball bat width worth of copper routed front to back. It's not new.

jollyllama
0 replies
3h40m

Thanks for the explainer, the 1989 comment threw me off.

hajile
0 replies
3h22m

PoE (power over ethernet) spec specifies 48 volts, so if you want to use off-the-shelf stuff, you need to use 48 volts.

Maxion
0 replies
3h28m

48V is a common POE standard. But Musk is again blowing a bunch of smoke.

hdjY28
3 replies
4h48m

Ah, the sweet spot between a cockpit and a calculator. You're spot on; we're not trying to relaunch Apollo 13 here. Sure, give us a touchscreen for the tech savvy, but let's not forget the tactile satisfaction of a good ol' button. And yeah, a universal button pad is like the Swiss Army knife of car controls – versatile, yet uncomplicated. Let's keep the touchscreens for Candy Crush and leave driving to the buttons.

pmontra
1 replies
4h36m

I'm tech savvy but I take physical buttons over touchscreen all the times. I switch radio channels with a wheel on a stick on the steering wheel, change volume with two buttons there. I don't dare using the touchpad for anything complex while driving.

Then there is the thing I never understood: we can't use a phone while driving but we can use the touchscreen of the car, which is basically the same thing. Actually I understand why we can't (or we don't want to) piss off car makers and all their money, but yet where is the logic in that from the point of view of safety?

jansan
0 replies
3h16m

I'm tech savvy but I take physical buttons over touchscreen all the times.

Are you sure? I am all in favor of physical buttons where you need quick access, for example steering wheel and climate control. But touch screens are quite awesome to simplify access to more complicated settings. I hate it when you have four buttons to navigate through nested menus.

velox_neb
0 replies
3h10m

You sound like ChatGPT.

seszett
0 replies
3h29m

you don't need [...] 9 buttons for favorite radio stations.

It certainly is nice being able to switch to one of a handful of stations with just one press, though. Why not have that?

jsight
0 replies
3h57m

Agreed, the VW approach here looks pretty good. It might even have fewer physical controls than the id.4?

fishywang
0 replies
2h56m

They should just copy Mazda's design, a screen that's not touch enabled and do not need to be put within arm's reach (so it can be put further away, and thus closer to driver's point of view when driving, that driver just need to glance slightly to the side to see the screen).

Then physical buttons/controls for common things (volume, wiper, etc.), and a general knob for navigating things on the screen.

calvinmorrison
0 replies
4h27m

A single cable.... can we at least get dedicated emergency flasher wiring?

titzer
8 replies
3h24m

What kills me is that we've known how to make UIs usable in human control situations for 4+ decades and this new generation of UX designers just ignore it. Look at the cockpit of an F-16 or F-22. Digital LCD displays ringed by physical buttons. Car UIs used to work like this, when they first introduced screens.

But the wider point is that we keep doing this over and over again, forgetting the lessons of the past, prioritizing flashy and less usable UI over ugly and usable because it's either cheaper or more convenient for the people making UIs, or it's the zeitgeist and it's all they know.

stavros
2 replies
3h21m

I love my 2014 Mercedes A-class. There's a screen and a joystick, and the controls never wrap around the elements. This means that I can press up/left a bunch of times without looking, and be sure I've ended up at a known point. From there, I can operate anything blind.

willcipriano
1 replies
3h11m

Original iPod was similar, still prefer that over any modern music player.

stavros
0 replies
3h8m

Exactly, that UX was perfect.

mastercheif
1 replies
3h14m

Your mistake is thinking that the car manufactures are optimizing for UX.

What they're actually optimizing for is looking impressive/high-tech to help sell cars and reducing build costs.

titzer
0 replies
3h2m

I know, and it's depressing as hell. One problem is that for almost any idea these days, the market that buys impressive-looking but unusable, throw-away UI is so much bigger than the rest of us that it attracts all the product offerings.

damnesian
1 replies
3h15m

Cheap, convenient, but also law of similarity. We are so smartphone focused now, practically on the species level, if people see a touchscreen, it's an interface they truly understand, it must be the cause of a perceivable sales bump.

epicide
0 replies
3h2m

You're alluding to the benefits of building interfaces to what people are already familiar with, but touchscreens are still a learned behavior. There is nothing about our physiology that affords anything with a touchscreen beyond touching it.

Touchscreens add flexibility (and lower production costs), but that flexibility comes at a cost. There is no universally agreed-upon usage for them. Certainly not to the degree that "[all] people" understand them the same way. It's all too common to run into a touchscreen-based interface that you haven't seen before and simply not realize you were meant to drag that one element, tap another, or long-press something. Discoverability can be useful, but that quickly loses its value when operating a vehicle -- at least beyond its entertainment system.

Buttons, knobs, wheels, sliders, and levers all have physical characteristics that signal some use. Keep in mind that those can also be (ab)used incorrectly! For example, imagine a knob that you shouldn't turn but must push or pull only. Or perhaps a button that you must twist.

hef19898
0 replies
3h15m

That is one thing, touch screen only, you can literally blame Tesla and Musk for. I know I do.

sjfjsjdjwvwvc
8 replies
4h56m

Touchpads are a horrible interface for almost any device - especially ones that can easily kill when there is an operator mistake.

God I hate touchpad or touch based controls or whatever the correct term is, even on mobile phones they are almost always terrible to use.

polski-g
3 replies
4h47m

Touchpad controls are so bad I've literally never played a game on my phone.

idkwhoiam
1 replies
3h20m

Same here. I cannot stand using touch interface to do anything other than lightweight web browsing. I found an XBox One wireless controller worked wonders with my iPad for gaming.

mihaaly
0 replies
3h7m

I avoid restaurants/shops where touchscreen is used for odering food. I simply go elsewhere. Order on a giant screen is both awkward (UIs are tend to be tuned to be flashy rather than functional) and disgusting.

dgrin91
0 replies
2h57m

I can't tell if this is sarcastic or not

spinningslate
0 replies
2h48m

I'm not big on touchscreens on phones, though it doesn't drive me mad personally. Real estate is a practical limitation and so forces trade-offs.

The big difference with a phone/tablet is that you're looking at the screen when using it. That's fundamental to the interaction experience. Cars are _completely_ different: a driver should be looking at *the road*.

Touchscreens as the main control interface for cars were a stupifying dumb idea right from the start. It's as if the alphageeks burst through the design studio doors, shunted the ergnonomicists aside, and proclaimed anything physical was neanderthal and out of date. Behold, the emperor has new clothes! "We can do all this in SOFTWARE, and it's adaptable, we can use clever colours, and look if you just tap this menu three times and slide along here, YOU CAN BOOST THE BASS IN THE RIGHT REAR SPEAKER! Show me how you do THAT with your Victorian buttons!".

Fair play to Mazda for leading the resistance movement here - and good to see VW actually listening and doing something about it. With any luck, touch screen car control will suffer the ignominious death it deserves.

ponector
0 replies
1h6m

Have you tried to use train ticket machine without touch screen? It is a nightmare, but popular in France.

Few buttons and a wheel - all you have to go through the journey to type your start and destination points, amount of people, age, discounts, etc.

mihaaly
0 replies
3h12m

And many argued that cars could be "improved" further with voice recognition....! Disaster waiting to happen.

ess3
0 replies
1h51m

My biggest gripe is touch interfaces on stoves. You constantly spill water or other things.

mgoetzke
8 replies
5h11m

It might be relevant to know though, that the way VW did their on-screen and on-steering wheel buttons where not state of the art. Glitches, missing feedback, latency etc.

Tesla also added more on-wheel capacitive buttons in their Model S refresh and got negative feedback, but they worked on it for the new Model 3 refresh and I only heard a much improved, basically physical button experience. Not to mention their non-existent UI lag on their screen.

So if customers only know laggy screens, and weird feeling buttons, maybe it is not always the right way forward to go backward.

adamjc
7 replies
5h10m

The only way to realistically use a non-tactile button is to take your eyes off the road to look at what you need to press. That's the issue, anything else is irrelevant. I'm glad they're going back to physical buttons, I won't buy a car that doesn't have them.

the8472
6 replies
5h7m

Perhaps we could replace mechanical feedback with tiny electrical shocks. Look ma, no moving parts.

malfist
4 replies
4h57m

How do you know which button your on without looking?

lawn
2 replies
4h45m

Because of muscle memory?

And well-designed physical buttons have identifiable marks or features on them to help you find the right one purely by touch. The input type (button, dial, lever) shape (round, square edges to the right), dots on the button and location (I change songs in the top left).

malfist
1 replies
3h42m

Not on a touchscreen you don't. Even with electric shocks as GP suggested.

lawn
0 replies
2h25m

Yeah sorry, I was thinking of regular physical buttons.

the8472
0 replies
4h10m

They prickle differently

simondotau
0 replies
4h57m

Apple has had success replacing mechanics with haptics on their trackpads.

rsynnott
4 replies
4h44m

The automaker has since reverted its since on the steering wheel buttons and is looking to now claw back its reputation for something that its current CEO, Thomas Schäfer, says "did a lot of damage" to the brand.

They aren’t even the first car manufacturer to reverse on this. Do these companies not test market these things? Like, I’ve never heard of anyone actually _liking_ these all-touch controls; it’s transparently making things worse to save a few cents.

brianmcc
2 replies
4h39m

I suspect there's an element of snazzy modern screens selling well, but it takes time for the bad feedback about sustained daily usage to accumulate.

Personally I'm inclined to write this one up to a confluence of "manufacturers think people want this", and also customers think "I want this" - and reality is now catching up!

nottorp
0 replies
3h7m

I believe the size of the touch screen in a car is now a marketing measure. Waiting for the 48 inchers.

natch
0 replies
2h38m

There's also customers think they want this ("this" being the change VW is now planning to give them), which I think is what is really going on here.

Later, customers will find out, but by that time, they will already own VWs, so VW will have achieved its goal. Similar pattern to dieselgate in my opinion.

bluGill
0 replies
3h16m

Some things sell really well when new even though once people had the car makers know it was a bad idea. So you see a lot of things put on cars for a while and then when people realize it isn't as good as it looks they get rid of it. Things that people like get put everywhere.

bhpm
4 replies
5h2m

It’s interesting to me that voice commands never come up in these discussions. Teslas have good voice controls, though they suffer from the typical lack of discoverability that all voice systems do.

Also, I think the original intention behind the touch screen was that you would be in auto pilot while using it.

malfist
3 replies
4h58m

Voice commands are awful. They misunderstand you, they require you to memorize a specific syntax to talk to a single car, your other car probably has a different one, and so will your next car. They're horrendously verbose and it takes seven hours to instruct it which address it should navigate to.

sjfjsjdjwvwvc
0 replies
4h51m

I can imagine a near future where voice controls are flexible, personalised, and portable using small LLM models running locally. They would adapt to your style and needs and be sort of like a universal interface to a lot of devices - not sure about cars to be honest but for navigation and similar functionality I imagine they would be pretty good.

I am also working on a small personal prototype of this - anyone know if there is a more serious project or company that is getting into this?

magicalhippo
0 replies
4h1m

Our car, Renault Megane e-Tech, uses Google, which I find works quite well. My SO has trouble finding the right words, and more often than not, the car does what she wants.

Though I found it struggles with non-native names, when I try to make calls. But starting navigation, turning off seat heating etc works very well.

bhpm
0 replies
3h26m

The number of commands for a car are pretty limited, so I don’t have any problem. But, I know that voice recognition has a very bad reputation, and also that nobody prefers it over buttons.

itslennysfault
3 replies
3h26m

AWESOME!! Physical buttons are great.

A while back I was considering buying a Tesla, but I rented a Model X for a long trip and overall found it pretty enjoyable. However, I found their heavy reliance on touch interface pretty annoying, and did a much deeper dive into other EVs as a result.

ubermonkey
2 replies
3h20m

Yeah, the no-buttons and no-Carplay thing completely DQs a Tesla for me.

natch
1 replies
2h54m

No buttons, lol. This is a common misunderstanding. Teslas have just the right number of buttons, and that number is not zero.

itslennysfault
0 replies
1h58m

Nah, seriously lacking in the button (and knob) department. I want a volume knob for my stereo and I want physical controls for my HVAC at minimum. There were several other things (I can't remember off-hand) that were buried in menus somewhere that frustrated me enough during the week I was renting the Model X to completely cross it off my list of cars.

lvl102
2 replies
4h46m

Wish car manufacturers simply design a place for an ipad and Apple integrates Carplay with it. That’d be my ideal setup. I rather not pay $5,000 (implied) for some infotainment system that will be outdated in two years.

lakpan
0 replies
4h32m

outdated in two years.

More like already out of date. There’s no chance that any system that doesn’t play Spotify is a match with my phone. Or any navigation that isn’t based off Google Maps. And so on.

If I have to connect my phone, they already lost.

Kaibeezy
0 replies
4h4m

Some airlines went to free WiFi (limited to streaming local content) and bring-your-own-tablet instead of screens in seatbacks. I’m not sure how that’s worked out, but my sense is it didn’t solve everything.

What if car dashboards were BYOD? A standardized API and connector, and you could have a choice of aftermarket UI -- screens, buttons, knobs, whatever. You could get used to it and bring it with you for rentals or to your new car.

virtualritz
1 replies
4h12m

The automotive industry as a whole created one of the biggest UX blunders ever with their IVI systems.

If your new smartphone has a different UI, learning that won't put anyone at risk.

Not so with the IVI system in a new car.

This is so obvious, you can only shake your head in disbelief the current state of affairs ever was allowed to be.

natch
0 replies
2h52m

This is so obvious, you can only shake your head in disbelief the current state of affairs ever was allowed to be.

But a lot of the disbelief and dismay people have is based on them imagining, with horror, things that are not actually the case.

olliebrkr
1 replies
4h43m

Thank god. I hate cars with touchscreen controls for core functions. I shouldn't have to look away from the screen for more than a minisecond to turn the temperature up a bit or turn up the volume.

natch
0 replies
2h40m

Fortunately, having touchscreen controls doesn't prevent those same controls from being accessible with buttons or voice.

mhb
1 replies
4h13m

Didn't the CEO and other decision makers try these interfaces before betting the company on them? Are they from a completely different world than the sample here who can see how obviously better physical affordances are?

nottorp
0 replies
3h6m

They don't drive themselves so...

It probably even feels fine the first 10 minutes and they're not likely to have more than that scheduled for one test.

Have them stuck in traffic for 45 min each morning and afternoon and they'll understand :)

m3kw9
1 replies
3h25m

A touch UI is actually always trying to simulate physical controls, it’s only better because you can have many controls in a small area but you need a lot more focus/brain to use the UI. Physical buttons are ideal still and as proven for cars

ralmidani
0 replies
3h14m

Even the small area argument is questionable; yes, cars these days have more functionality than they did in 1993, but the center console has also gotten progressively larger.

coev
1 replies
5h6m

Funny enough, the Taos and Jetta, which are their cheapest models, have physical buttons for volume and climate control and there isn't this level of friction using the car. I have a Taos, so I paid less for a better experience than a GTI or ID4 driver.

jamincan
0 replies
4h55m

I just bought a Taos this past July and the general familiarity of the interior controls (pretty much all buttons) coming from a Mk7 Golf was a big factor in going with it.

billpg
1 replies
5h3m

Good. Can the regular roadworthiness tests be updated to fail cars that don't have physical buttons or dials for essential controls? These cars need taking off the road.

plagiarist
0 replies
4h47m

The cars with aftermarket (now market) LED lamps tilted up also need to go, both are massive safety concerns.

TriangleEdge
1 replies
5h4m

I don't think having physical buttons worked well for BlackBerry. My guess it'll be the same for cars. It'll look and feel vintage, maybe. I rented a car recently that had a physical key that turned in a keyhole, and each time I wanted to use the car, I'd look for the button before I remembered.

FirmwareBurner
0 replies
4h51m

>I don't think having physical buttons worked well for BlackBerry.

Phones aren't 2T vehicles you need to control at speed or you'll kill someone.

If you want a paralel form the consumer tech space, look at game consoles. They all use primarily highly tactile physical buttons and switches instead of large touchscreens, because that's best for accurate control using your muscle memory while keeping your eyes focused on the TV where the action happens, instead of looking at the control surfaces.

Muscle memory is a very important thing in safe vehicle control of any kind, not just cars. Look at crane or excavator operators. They're also looking out the window at what the hook or scoop is doing instead of at the levers they're pulling.

yakshaving_jgt
0 replies
3h59m

I didn't notice this in the article, but I wonder if this is only Volkswagen, or if this decision will extend to the rest of VAG.

I'm quite disappointed that the new Porsche models have a load of touch screens. I'm a fan of the Cayenne from 2012 which has an interior full of physical buttons and feels a bit like an airplane cockpit.

usrusr
0 replies
4h14m

“Dangerous cost-cutting measure not universally loved"

twoodfin
0 replies
4h26m

They’ve replaced it since, but I’ve really come to appreciate the control scheme of my 2016 Acura RDX.

Two screens, one positioned and angled for touch, one for driver visibility. Physical controls for climate, volume, and accessing touchscreen functions & menus.

This doesn’t seem like an incredibly hard problem, but rather that designers (or the marketing folks) have been convinced customers are impressed by extremes. In the ‘90s, dozens of buttons on the steering wheel. Today, nothing but massive screens.

tradevapp
0 replies
3h31m

Good! I miss the clicky knobs in my car. I don't mind touch controls when they're always on the same place and don't require navigating submenus.

supergeek133
0 replies
4h8m

This reminds me of the Navy issue years back that caused them to rip out all the touchscreen interfaces.

Critical path controls should not be touchscreen.

septune
0 replies
1h15m

I am curious as to the timeframe within which SpaceX will endeavor to emulate this accomplishment.

seltzered_
0 replies
4h29m

It's kinda funny that this piece is written with nothing about all the issues and changes at Cariad, VW's software group having all sorts of issues for years and is been undergoing a reorganization.

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38131504 , and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35851369

Feels more like PR to encourage improvements are coming.

ralmidani
0 replies
3h4m

I’m really not against touchscreens, but cramming more and more functionality into them, indiscriminately, is deplorable and just not good UX/UI.

I’m very far from being a usability expert, but I think a good rule of thumb would be putting less-essential __digital__ functions like maps and audio in the touchscreen, but essential __mechanical__ functions like climate control (which includes seat heating/ventilation) be controlled by physical buttons, switches, sliders, and/or knobs. This makes it more intuitive and also more safe to control frequently-modified functionality while keeping eyes on the road.

I believe this is an essential safety issue, and it’s infuriating that companies with billions of dollars in resources and, presumably, lots of engineers and designers and usability experts with concerns that are probably ignored. Especially as cars continue to include more headline safety features (i.e. used to sell and even upsell) which are far more expensive than the components they’re skimping on. It’s very petty and irresponsible.

The US government has more or less abdicated its responsibility to keep corporate greed in check. Hopefully, the EU will step in and fill that void.

palemoonale
0 replies
4h13m

Rented a Toyota Vios lately with that horrific tablet-as-HU. Just having to visibly hit the exact volume down 'button (spot) when in need, instead of VERY quickly turning a physical knob down, made me curse them every time.

neogodless
0 replies
5h14m

Previous, related discussions:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38686967 17 hours ago, 211 comments (thedrive.com)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38678853 1 day ago, 52 comments (afronomist.com)

maxehmookau
0 replies
4h31m

I know this irks a lot of people, but I've had a Skoda Enyaq iV for a year or so now and the fact that most of the buttons are on a screen make no difference to me at all.

There's physical buttons for the windscreen blowers, and hazard lights and few other critical things. Otherwise, it's just not been an issue for me at all.

lifestyleguru
0 replies
4h7m

The turning point will be ads displayed in these ridiculous screens. Or not. On top of existing product placement e.g. preinstalled apps, upselling certain subscriptions, premium POIs, etc. If this continues, in 10 years the driver will have only huge screen in front of them and the car will self drive straight away to Shell then to Lidl and the range of the car will be just enough to come back home.

kvgr
0 replies
4h44m

I have a car from VW concern that has touch sensitive temperature and volume. They are absolutely invisible at night.

kgwxd
0 replies
3h30m

Touch screens, DRM, and subscription based upgrades need to die ASAP.

jugjug
0 replies
3h57m

Reminds on Rich Hickey ranting about touch screens in cars [1] in Design in Practice:

We do not have feature X" is never a valid problem statement. If you need proof of this you only need to look at a modern car which has a touch screen where no one said, "I need to slide my finger on some random piece of glass to a precise point to set my blower in my car while I am driving." No one has ever said that, right? But somebody did say, "We need touch screens because young people will never buy our cars." This is what happens when you are not talking about the problem.

[1]: https://youtu.be/c5QF2HjHLSE?si=M6apr6fG_YaIDOpj&t=1826

ho_schi
0 replies
3h46m

Endlich.

Four years after Mazda. But the video still shows big touchscreens, useless themes and distractions of the driver. Why they mount office monitors on the cockpit instead of building them into the cockpit?

I count 9 buttons. No distinct knobs for volume or temperature. Again One button, one function. Not two functions, no long pressing, half pressing or whatever bad user interface ideas somebody can have. Donald A. Norman explained that well in The design of everyday things. And group that stuff logically.

haspok
0 replies
3h22m

The members of the business committee who decided that to operate the 4 windows 2 buttons are enough should be sentenced to driving a Trabant in their remaining lives. What were they thinking?... Of course, it was a desperate cost saving measure. No engineer could have come up with that stupid an idea.

globular-toast
0 replies
3h18m

I thought for the longest time that touch controls were a misguided attempt by manufacturers to do something "cool" because buttons are considered "boring". But I've come to realise they are doing it simply because it's cheaper. I'm sad that most electronics I've bought in the past few years have touch buttons. In all cases I wish they were real buttons. There are very few actual advantages, apart from it being cheaper.

eimrine
0 replies
4h59m

(buying a brand new Volkswagen in future) What's in the trunk in a plastic bag? your physical buttons, sir! You can stick them with double-sided tape wherever you want!

dagurp
0 replies
4h19m

I hope it will be proper buttons then, not whatever they're using in the ID.3. I think all ID owners have opened the rear windows when they mean to open the ones in the front.

chaoticmass
0 replies
3h15m

I bought a 2011 4runner last year and one thing I really like about it is the lack of a big infotainment touch screen. Lots of physical buttons.

bearcobra
0 replies
4h57m

I think the ultimate solution will combine touch screens with physical buttons and dials that adapt to different contexts. Ford already has what is effectively a stylus dial and products like the Elgato Stream Deck have basically solved how it could work with regular buttons.

amelius
0 replies
4h14m

Why is everything in that car curved, except the screens?

aczerepinski
0 replies
4h24m

I love my VW GTI and I won’t replace it with an electric car until someone releases something equally good in a similar form factor (hot hatch or close). The physical button UI is a huge part or why I love the car. The mockup here is better than no buttons but not as good as my 2018 car.

Podgajski
0 replies
3h50m

There are two cars in my life that I liked more than any other car. The first was my 1965 Corvair and the second was my 1998 Kia Sephia.

Today’s car drive you, you don’t drive the car. I sat in a Tesla and felt I was in a future that I didn’t want to be in. Everything physical abstracted away into a smooth curve or a flat screen. we have let middlemen come between us in reality and we’re going to pay for it whether it’s in more expensive repairs or dislocation from nature.

NanoYohaneTSU
0 replies
4h24m

Tactile feedback is essential for fast operation. Touchscreens have done nothing but slow everything down in exchange for ease of use.

Justsignedup
0 replies
3h17m

Buttons are great. But also critical is software. On my old prius there was one knob for temperature, and you push it sideways to change temp, intensity, mode, etc, and that sucks during driving.

I am very happy my Mazda has dedicated single-function physical buttons, and it'll automatically switch to the mode you're thinking of when you press a button.

The tablet control via physical button is amazing compared to touch screen, takes a minute to get used to, but far far far far far far far less distracting when driving than a touchscreen.

JumpinJack_Cash
0 replies
3h48m

BMW had this solved in 2003 with their central wheel interface

But they are not a hot California startup speaking at TEDx about how they will change the world so they must be in the wrong.

JoeAltmaier
0 replies
4h52m

Not sure they should be over by the pad. Again, I have to reach for them, which means I have to take my eyes off the road to find them.

ChrisArchitect
0 replies
4h12m
93po
0 replies
1h53m

I've recently been having to drive a higher end Audi from maybe... 2008? And the physical button situation is a complete fucking mess and I hate it. While driving I was trying to find the way to turn off the AC entirely because I was fed up with it being too hard to control and it took me literally 15 seconds to find it (mostly due to also driving at the same time). The UI (if you can call it that) of physical buttons is complete garbage in most cars. My daily, when I'm home, is a Yaris with three huge physical knobs - temperature, fan speed, and vent choice. It's perfect, I get exactly what I want, I don't physically have to look at it at all, I don't have to deal with automatic climate control which sucks in every single car. I'm just venting and have no real point here I guess other than physical controls suck unless it's super basic and simple.

4bpp
0 replies
3h32m

There seems to be a whole genre of announcements from corporations and politicians where they partially backtrack on some all around terrible change while congratulating themselves on listening to their customers (with a clear undertone of bitterness about this being the case).

I can understand (without being particularly happy about) politicians having their own agenda that does not align with the majority of voters, but why is it that vendors producing widgets are so strong-willed about certain details? Why won't any car manufacturer make a car with no touchscreens except perhaps for a satnav that has no data link to the rest of the car electronics at all, or any laptop manufacturer make a laptop with non-chiclet keys (in the style of pre-x230 thinkpads)? Surely there would be a deeply underserved customer base to capture in both cases; one could really get the sense that corporations feel that satisfying those customers would be downright immoral.