33 ms·

Praise to Mazda for making this decision. As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars. For year

Praise to Mazda for making this decision. As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars. For years I have been working on product interfaces (not just apps). Many studies I conducted actually told me that people favored analog controls over digital touch screens controls. It gives you tactile feedback, making it accessible for anyone with sense of touch. > Audi, for instance has said that part of the reason it’s discontinuing its rotary controller is that a touchscreen better supports Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. This to me is insane reasoning. That is no way user centric. This decision is 100% business driven and has nothing to do with the end user. It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. > phones and tablets are familiar, so too should in-vehicle touchscreens. This too is so weird to me. I get that you want users to recognize an interface. And that it should mimic how you use other things. But at least put them in context. I hope other brands start following Mazda again for this choice.

cm2187 7y ago
Agree, except when you need to type a name.
- gambiting 7y ago
  Then MB/BMW approach of having a touchpad near your wrist is perfect - you can draw letters with your finger without having to worry about hitting miniscule letters on the screen.
  - majewsky 7y ago
    Do they have a second touchpad for us lefties?
    - gambiting 7y ago
      Well, I'm in the UK so I have to use it with my left hand even though I am right handed - it works fine. Because the letter recognition is based on a single letter at a time it works fine even if I make an absolute mess of it with my left hand.
- marapuru 7y ago
  When you need to type a full name. Having a keyboard present could give a huge advantage. This is not equal to having a touch screen. Next to that, my car has a system where you choose 1 letter and only the next possibility pops up. It decreases the need of a full keyboard. It's quite likely you only need to choose the first 3 to 4 letters.
  - rockinghigh 7y ago
    I wonder if you’ve used Tesla’s touchscreen or even Apple CarPlay with a touchscreen and Google Maps. You only seem to mention these old UIs. The rotary control on a virtual keyboard is atrocious to type addresses and points of interest.
  - llampx 7y ago
    I would actually like a stronger integration with the phone for cases like this. If you need directions, just load it up on google maps and send it to your car. If you need to pull up a playlist, same thing. Of course if you are driving this should be done by the passenger.
_Codemonkeyism 7y ago
Touch screens in cars are the equivalent of shiny phones. They persuade people to buy and some of them might love them. Nearly every phone I see has a protector around it, destroying the nice looking design because one drop and it breaks. But you still need to have shiny designed phones or you won't sell them. So cudos to Mazda. I wonder if they can keep this policy up when everyone else has shiny large touchscreens.
grey-area 7y ago
All these tactile controls are going to be deleted in the next decade as self driving cars go mainstream. This is a foolish move.
- benj111 7y ago
  Should there be an /s tag in there somewhere? I can't tell.
- SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
  Last time I was in a cab it had controls in the back for the AC, a light, the windows etc. - just because I'm not driving doesn't mean I don't want to interact with the car at all.
  - pbhjpbhj 7y ago
    But you don't need to interact with the car without looking, that's only for those driving, so tactile interfaces don't give much/any gain.
- dwighttk 7y ago
  Decade? Psh... Elon says 6-18 months!
  - grey-area 7y ago
    Elon Musk is, as usual, right but with the wrong timing.
beambot 7y ago
Care to elaborate on your studies? Not many cars have gone full touchscreen. I grant you that it took a bit of getting used to on my Tesla, but now I'd never want to go back. Curious how you controller for familiarity in your studies.
quakenul 7y ago
> As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars The flexibility to benefit from rapid product iteration. If you think of cars as mostly software products that receive updates over the air, a flexible interface makes a lot more sense (even though I agree that it makes for a pretty bad user interface).
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
  If we extend this idea, why not do it for airplanes? It seems like a bad idea to be changing the layout of mission-critical systems. I'm sure it'd wreak havoc if the cockpit of a 787 was all touch screens, with UI changes pushed at the whim of developers. I drive a car with analog controls. The buttons for controlling the radio, hazard lights, the A/C, etc are all static. I wouldn't want it to change. It gets the job done; it doesn't need iteration, and messing with it would reduce safety. I don't have to look at the controls, because the buttons are of various shapes/sizes that I know. Tactile feedback is value in keeping eyes on the road.
  - Isinlor 7y ago
    How about spacecraft with touchscreens: https://www.spacex.com/crew-dragon https://www.spacex.com/crew-dragon ? Compare to the cockpit of Space Shuttle: https://i.redd.it/9mj5bcbnzsx21.jpg https://i.redd.it/9mj5bcbnzsx21.jpg
    - Phillipharryt 7y ago
      I hope you're arguing in favour of the space shuttle there. It has no contextual buttons. I'll always argue that contextual controls do not belong in critical systems. Every button on that shuttle will do the same thing every time you press it. A touch screen looks nice but isn't safe. Mission control is telling you to press X button, but X button isn't actually on your display right now?? That's a big problem.
      - Aser 7y ago
youngtaff 7y ago
In my Mazda, above 5MPH the touchscreen doesn't respond to touch any more and you need to use the rotary controller (which is good as muscle memory allows you to use it effectively)
dzhiurgis 7y ago
They should put screen tactile screen feedback into seat...
hrktb 7y ago
> As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars. For me there is two different scenarii for controlling the car: - while driving quick adjustments: volume up/volume down, temperature control, play/stop/skip music, start/stop navigation. All of those should be via easy to understand, direct access physical controls. - while parked (or by a passanger): navigation setting, app switching, playlist adjustments, peripherals setup, air control strategies, anything finicky really. I see a case for these operations to be done by a touchscreen with no physical equivalent. Physical controls for those are juste hell most of the time. In that sense, I feel Mazda is just throwing the towel when a more sensible and best of both world approach could be taken.
- neogodless 7y ago
  In the 2015 Mazda I drive, they allow touch under 5 mph (I think?) But I installed Android Auto using third-party/open source software (and touch is always-on.) By default on your phone, plugged into the car, you have to swipe/unlock Android Auto, but if you're parked, you can do that, and access your apps, including Google Maps. You can set your destination, and it immediately opens on the car screen. I'm completely fine with this model of interface - when parked, use your phone. However, having said all that, if you still want to use a wheel, it's important they hit the right UI. In a BMW I rented, the way it only showed relevant letters while searching for an address (using the wheel) was pretty good and I was able to type in an address surprisingly quickly, even on my first time of using the software. Probably still not quite as quick as using a touch screen, but close enough. I suspect that when you allow touchscreen as your fallback, it's harder to be "really good" about making a good wheel + button UI. It's too easy to lean on your crutch.
Fnoord 7y ago
> As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars. For years I have been working on product interfaces (not just apps). How does this relate to Apple Magic Trackpad with Force Touch?
- Fnoord 7y ago
  Sorry, I badly quoted there. Was meant to quote this: > Many studies I conducted actually told me that people favored analog controls over digital touch screens controls. It gives you tactile feedback, making it accessible for anyone with sense of touch. Given that Force Touch give a form of feedback (haptic though), isn't that good enough? How many people believe that the Force Touch gives tactile feedback instead of haptic?
JulianMorrison 7y ago
Everyone wanted to be Star Trek The Next Generation and/or Minority Report. That is the reality of it. Shiny futurist magic finger-wavy interfaces. Which were designed to look as cool as possible in movies and not on the basis of practical affordance.
- yellowapple 7y ago
  At least in TNG the voice recognition software (more-or-less) reliably understood what the user was saying.
thrower123 7y ago
Hopefully this is a trend that catches on; I was resolved to never buy a vehicle that had touch screen controls in it, after seeing what a mess Ford had made with the UX in my wife's 2019 Edge, compared to what I have in my 2010 F150. I think touchscreens are dangerous as hell to have in vehicles, because you cannot operate them by feel alone, like you can with a buttons and knobs interface. People are distracted enough playing on their phones while they drive, so selfishly for my own safety, I don't really want them futzing around with the janky touchscreen display to change the radio or mess with the air conditioning too.
practice9 7y ago
You would reconsider your point of view if you have seen some truly evil UIs using rotary controls. Worst thing is when you need a manual to understand how the thing works, and manual DOES NOT specify all the options. I, as user, would prefer a large touch screen for changing settings and navigating, and several programmable analog buttons for when I'm driving. Rotary controllers are evil.
- mrmonkeyman 7y ago
  My mazda's rotary controller is heaven on earth thank you very much.
agumonkey 7y ago
Can't wait for pocket computers to follow too.
- jordache 7y ago
  nope! touch sscreen UI has safety implications inside a motor vehicle. pocket computer's usage scope is way broader than inside a car, and you REQUIRE the infinite UI possibility provided by a pure touch interface
  - agumonkey 7y ago
    Still a massive limitation to be expected to use the device eyes on and high attention. I get that this is the trend but it's still not a good qualitative point.
    - jordache 7y ago
      in the context of an automotive interface, I agree with you touch UI is not the best. I was responding to general purpose computing (smartphone) that the OP was referring to.
nova22033 7y ago
>It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. Or, people actually like CarPlay and Android Auto and audi would have to spend a lot of money to keep up. Newer audis already support CarPlay. They're only switching from a rotary controller to a touch screen.
6thaccount2 7y ago
Makes me tempted to buy a Mazda. I like the AWD and reliability of a Suburu, but their touch screens are absolute garbage and going from my analog 6-disc changing Honda Accord to driving the much newer Subaru is painful.
- nradov 7y ago
  I recently bought a new Subaru. It has regular buttons and dials on the dashboard and steering wheel for all the important stuff. The touch screen works fine with Android Auto.
  - brokenmachine 7y ago
    That sounds like a nice setup.
fsagx 7y ago
Mazda (at least my Mazda6 from a few years ago) can do this because they have a great interface to the entertainment/info system. They have a joystick with a few mouse-like buttons on the center console just behind the gear shift. It's very easy to do common tasks like change volume, change station, skip to next in playlist without taking eyes off the road. My wife actually didn't realize for more than a year that the screen was a touch screen. She had never had to use it.
- albeec13 7y ago
  Yup, agree 100%. We bought a 2014 Mazda 6, and while it has a touch screen, I find myself only using the control knob 99% of the time. It's vastly superior to any touchscreen interface I've ever used, and also far better than some of the mouse-like joysticks in some cars (think later 201X Lexus vehicles and such).
loudtieblahblah 7y ago
public reason: safety. Private reason: we want total voice controlled system so we can listen to everything you say & do in car, log it and get into the ad and analytics business. One step at a time well be here.
giancarlostoro 7y ago
When my iPod Classic died it really stung especially since they discontinued them. I hate playing music on my phone. I cant skip songs or pause without looking properly if I am on an aux cable. Sure Bluetooth is a thing but you dont always drive your own car and every car has their own convoluted way to do Bluetooth. I wish Android or iPhones had multimedia related buttons somewhere on them (dont miss that lock button / slider thing Apple used to add in so you dont butt skip a song). It is much safer for me to feel out specific buttons while driving than looking down on my phone screen.
- oauea 7y ago
  You can skip tracks by long pressing the volume keys if you configure it: https://www.xda-developers.com/skip-music-tracks-android-volume-keys-no-root/ https://www.xda-developers.com/skip-music-tracks-android-vol...
  - moftz 7y ago
    This used to be a stock feature in a lot of phones. I haven't had a phone that did this since my HTC Droid Incredible back in 2011.
  - giancarlostoro 7y ago
    I tried to figure out how to do this a number of times, but never saw a clear answer. I might try it next time I'm driving around.
- dreamcompiler 7y ago
  Not to mention that the on-the-go playlist feature worked great on iPods (just hold the button down) but Apple still hasn't figured that out on iPhones. Agree that Bluetooth is a nightmare. Every Bluetooth radio wants to dig into my phone and download my contacts (and who knows what else) but all I want to do is play music. If I do this in a rental car I have to remember to figure out how to wipe the radio when I'm returning the car and already rushing to catch a plane, so I don't even bother with Bluetooth any more. It's maddening.
rockinghigh 7y ago
I have used Audi’s version of CarPlay without a touchscreen and I hated it. Circling through icons that were designed for a touch interface made no sense. Tesla’s interface is not perfect but interacting with the map is so much better with its large touchscreen.
- higginsc 7y ago
  Yep. I recently spent a day driving an S5 and S6, and the non-touchscreen carplay was terrible. I have a touchscreen version in my 2017 CR-V, and it is a joy to use. I read the comments in this thread, and it makes me laugh. So much "TOUCHSCREENS ARE THE DEVIL, NOBS AND BUTTONS ONLY." It just doesn't jive with my experience at all. Maybe it's a generation gap thing? I'm 30 FWIW.
  - Fins 7y ago
    Possibly. If the only thing you're used to and expect is a touchscreen, you will long for a touchscreen even when it is objectively a worse experience. Seriously... I've seen people right here on HN claiming that "look, navigate to a touch menu, navigate to another menu, select an item, press and hold" is superior to "press one button on the door".
aphextim 7y ago
I have an older Sebring from 2010 with only 25k miles on it I was able to snag up for a good deal. Was a nicer 'limited' one so it still had a newer touch screen console. It is annoying as you touch it once to 'activate' it and then have to tap the screen a second time to register the press on whatever button/input you were trying to touch. No tactile feedback and having to press it twice and visually check to make sure the input you wanted worked. It is much more time consuming/distracting than an older vehicle in my personal experience.
gingabriska 7y ago
Whole windshield should a screen and we should be able to just wave at it to perform operation or simply talk to it.
- GrumpyNl 7y ago
  You cant wave at it, two hands on the wheel:)
rco8786 7y ago
As a counter point - we’re already seeing the role of the driver fading away from car travel. lane holding tech is readily available in your average car now. Tesla’s can drive themselves a large portion of the time. Etc. Concerns about tactile feedback and such don’t really matter if you don’t have to pay attention to the road anymore. As we’ve seen play out with phones, people vastly prefer touch screens and vastly prefer familiarity. Standardizing cars across a couple of different interfaces vs each car having a brand new layout of analog switches, knobs, and doo-hickeys is a much better rider experience. Much like how a “phone” went from “a device to call someone on” to what an iPhone does today, a “car” is going from “something you drive” to just another device you interact with in various ways and it also happens to be able to get you from point A to point B.
- jodrellblank 7y ago
  people vastly prefer touch screens Do they? A car's dashboard doesn't have to be small enough to fit in your pocket; it doesn't have a screen you want to look at constantly where there's a direct trade-off between screen space and physical keyboard space; a car's dashboard doesn't have limits of where buttons can be because you have to hold it around the edges without pressing the buttons accidentally. I still hate typing with on-screen keyboards, I just grudgingly accept that for a given small phone size, I'd prefer more of it to be screen than keyboard. That doesn't at all mean I want my car to turn into an Android tablet because I prefer a touchscreen in the constraints of a pocket size device.
  - bumby 7y ago
    If people really do vastly prefer touch screens, I would expect to see different control mechanisms moving in this direction (steering, shifting, etc.) The fact that they aren't going this way in the systems that __really__ matter seems to indicate that people don't really prefer touch screens.
    - rco8786 7y ago
      Come on. My iPhone still has some tactile mechanisms also. But 99% of my interactions with it are via touch screen. That's what you're describing.
aledthemathguy 7y ago
> As a User Experience Professional May I politely ask - what exactly do you learn to be a UEP (pardon the abbreviation)?
EastSmith 7y ago
Agreed. I've been using touch car interface for the last 5 years (Chevy). I basically do two things: - Bluetooth connect - listen to spotify _from_ my phone / listen to map directions _from_ my phone. I rarely use the touch interface - I am switching tracks either using the buttons on the wheel (most of the time), or using the phone. Also, I do not want another yet another "kind of familiar but different" interface like most of the car touch control systems. I want the interface on my phone, that's it.
jforman 7y ago
> It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. The one piece of feedback I gave Toyota in their post-purchase survey is: please replace the hot mess that is Entune with CarPlay. They absolutely should give up. You can't compete with an OS and ecosystem into which billions of dollars have been sunk. I agree, for what it's worth, that analog controls are superior to touch controls while driving. I hate that Toyota replaced an audio dial with a touch up/down control. But the value of CarPlay is just way too high.
- justin66 7y ago
  Isn't CarPlay exclusive to iOS devices? If so, what you're describing might be viable with Lexus. It'd be somewhat pointless with the Toyota brand, where iOS users are a rather small minority.
  - galangalalgol 7y ago
    Seriously? People will have the newest iPhone before they shell out for a car with a working air conditioner. The car is gone as a status symbol, the phone is now arrived.
    - justin66 7y ago
      We know that iPhone enjoys a minority of smartphone market share, and we know that Lexus is the luxury brand and Toyota is the everyday brand. One assumes iPhone will be overrepresented among Lexus buyers and underrepresented among Toyota buyers. Therefore it would make very little sense for the Toyota brand to abandon Android users in favor of iOS users in the design of its dashboard systems.
      - galangalalgol 7y ago
        I wasn't suggesting they ditch android auto, but literally everyone but Mazda and Toyota have carplay as an option. Even Kia and Hyundai. Chevy,GMC,ford,Dodge, Chrysler,jeep,Fiat,Nissan, Honda, Mitsubishi. All have carplay. Mazda is going simple, which I respect. I drive a Miata pre touchscreen and I use a $50 Android phone. But to have a touchscreen an not have android auto and carplay? Why?
ubermonkey 7y ago
>As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars. Before phone integration, I might've agreed with you, or at least had no opinion on the subject. After watching many car companies, even high-end ones like BMW and Mercedes, fail utterly at producing reasonable phone integration systems or interfaces, though, I'm all-in on CarPlay. >It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. Correct. They have given up, and it's good that they have, because they've all proven they absolutely suck at it. In the meantime, Apple and Google (?) have done it for them, at least as far as the phone goes. (I assume the Android equivalent is equally good; no reason it shouldn't be.) >This to me is insane reasoning. That is no way user centric. I think it really IS, though. CarPlay is amazingly good, and only really works well with a touchscreen. At this point, it would be very hard for me to buy a car that didn't have CarPlay integration with a touchscreen. I've seen implementations without touch, and they're much, much less useful. I do agree, though, that touchscreens beyond phone interfaces should be used very sparingly. The Tesla's all-touchscreen situation in particular seems like a terrible idea. Most of us are used to being able to adjust the AC without looking, and that's only possible because there are physical controls we can feel. But the phone interface is distinct from that, and needs to be a touchscreen. When it's not, or when it's not present, people just pick up their phones and use them, which is worse.
- fatnoah 7y ago
  >I've seen implementations without touch, and they're much, much less useful. I have this. I never use it. Instead, I mount my phone next to the screen and use Android Auto on my phone. Using the rotary dial and other buttons is a) far more difficult and b) far more distracting while driving. An action that takes 1 second with a touch requires several seconds of fumbling with a knob and buttons w/out touch.
  - xx_alpha_xx 7y ago
    But the important different IMHO is that a knob / buttons don't require you to take your eyes off the road. In that 1 second you look down, you could cause an accident due to inattention.
michaelt 7y ago
As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars. Stage 1: We need a touchscreen so we can show a keyboard for sat nav address entry. Stage 2: Well, given that we've got this touchscreen, we might as well use it for.....
Spooky23 7y ago
Of course it's not user centric. It's about capturing more revenue while limited the parts in the car. Back in the day, you had modular radio mounts. Ford broke the mold with the Ford Taurus and the integrated controls that you couldn't replace. Now, if you care about a nice radio in your car, you need to upgrade your entire car for $5k. I have an otherwise awesome Honda Pilot with a built in, unsupported android tablet that doesn't support carplay or android auto, and is hard to replace without heavy hackery because core controls of the car are built into the tablet.
lhorie 7y ago
Have you tried inputting directions into a car GPS using rotary controls? It's reminiscent of old rotary phones and IMHO a terrible UX
- Fins 7y ago
  Better than touchscreen, though, especially when moving (only doing it as a passenger, of course!)
  - lhorie 7y ago
    Having used both, I vastly prefer the touchscreen. The rotary input takes way longer to navigate to the next letter, and it's easier to make mistakes (e.g. accidentally switching modes) and it's harder to fix them (need to cycle all the way to the end to hit backspace, sometimes having to start from scratch if your mistake was "jump out of input mode")
    - Fins 7y ago
      I've tried Android Auto in a Sonata with touch screen, and Passat and a Q5 with rotary controller. The latter were far easier to use, once you've spent 5 minutes making sure you understand how it works. Maybe if the touch screen were Tesla-sized it would have been easier to use, but on a regular sized screen, even switching modes takes much more attention with a touch screen, because you need to look at it, move your hand to it, make sure you're hitting the correct location, wait until it registers,m make sure you've actually hit the right spot. With a rotary it was "slide down, no need to look because it clicks, click or two clockwise (still no need to look), push down, q
    - Fins 7y ago
      I've tried Android Auto in a Sonata with touch screen, and Passat and a Q5 with rotary controller. The latter were far easier to use, once you've spent 5 minutes making sure you understand how it works. Maybe if the touch screen were Tesla-sized it would have been easier to use, but on a regular sized screen, even switching modes takes much more attention with a touch screen, because you need to look at it, move your hand to it, make sure you're hitting the correct location, wait until it registers,m make sure you've actually hit the right spot. With a rotary it was "slide down, no need to look because it clicks, click or two clockwise (still no need to look), push down, quick glance that you're on the right screen, click clock- or counterclock-wise to select what you need. Much safer and easier, and you're not going to hit a wrong thing because you drove over a bump. For entering addresses a large touch screen is nicer, but then a keyboard is even better, but since you're only supposed to do that while parked, so hitting a wrong button shouldn't be a big problem.
habosa 7y ago
I think supporting Android Auto and CarPlay is pretty user centric. Those are the only half decent in-car interfaces I've ever used. Nothing else is close.
jbigelow76 7y ago
> Audi, for instance has said that part of the reason it’s discontinuing its rotary controller is that a touchscreen better supports Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. This to me is insane reasoning. That is no way user centric. This decision is 100% business driven and has nothing to do with the end user. That statement isn't true, Car Play support for me was a non-negotiable for the car I purchased two years ago. Another friend made Android Auto support a big factor in his decision and said he wouldn't buy another vehicle that didn't support it. From other conversations we don't seem to be outliers, that feature support is incredibly user(buyer) centric.
- boboguitar 7y ago
  > Car Play support for me was a non-negotiable for the car I purchased two years ago. It's a big point in my car buying decision just for the navigation experience alone.
- Fins 7y ago
  But you can do CarPlay/AAuto without the touchscreen idiocy.
  - spookthesunset 7y ago
    Yes. At least with CarPlay you can use the knob thing on our Mazda and not use the touchscreen at all (which is disabled when the vehicle is in motion).
fuckyah 7y ago
yes i agree! i love bmw's wheel knob.
electriclove 7y ago
You've got to be kidding? Yes, the touchscreens on many/most of the cars out there are a horrible user experience. I've shared in that frustration. But just look to how Tesla has handled this to see what can be possible. It isn't perfect by any means but it is such an improvement to the user experience (being able to add buttons via the UI to enable new features, maps that respond quickly, etc). They still have analog controls for volume and other things. Touchscreens are here to stay. The user experience just needs to improve.
mbesto 7y ago
> It gives you tactile feedback, making it accessible for anyone with sense of touch. Tactile feedback is also a huge security benefit. This is what really doesn't make sense to me about the desire for touchscreens in cars - they're inherently dangerous.
saghm 7y ago
> That is no way user centric. This decision is 100% business driven and has nothing to do with the end user. It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. Genuinely curious: what does the interface being "branded" have to to with the user? To me, focusing on whether their interface is branded would be more business-driven rather than user-centric.
cbsmith 7y ago
> This to me is insane reasoning. That is no way user centric. This decision is 100% business driven and has nothing to do with the end user. It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. ...or figured out that you aren't as good at software as you are at building cars. Honestly, CarPlay/Auto have been a godsend for me. The navigation software works better than anything I get from car manufacturers and just keeping me from mucking with my phone is fantastic. That said... I'm not sure the touchscreen part of that is the real winner there for me.
grillvogel 7y ago
I have a newer subaru with a touchscreen and an older audi with the MMI rotary wheel. The rotary wheel is a superior interface, it has a slight learning curve, but then you do most operations by feel without needing to spend much time looking at the screen. the touch screen is finicky, and by definition requires you to take your eyes off the road to use it.
pwg 7y ago
> As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars. You are viewing the 'need' from the end user perspective. That is likely not the driving force that is causing touch screen proliferation. The likely driving force that is causing it is the manufacturers BOM costs. A single, rectangular, touch screen, that can swallow up a bunch of different knobs and buttons and basic displays, is likely cheaper from an overall BOM perspective than the set of knobs and buttons and basic displays (and supporting material (mechanical and wiring) for those knobs/buttons/displays). And, if two (or more) different car models use the same size rectangular screen, then one single "screen" can be used for plural models (with only software differences) vs. the need for unique moldings/buttons/etc. when providing the physical knobs and buttons on different models. The touch screen also enables different "accessory classes" even within the same model by a software change vs. a different piece of hardware. Think basic hot/cold/manual blower speed climate control vs. higher end climate control where you set a specific temp and the system picks heat/cool/blower speed. The same single touch screen can provide both the 'basic' and the 'luxury' interface via a software change vs. two different physical control units inserted into the dash.
- TheGRS 7y ago
  Are knobs and plastic moldings that expensive though? I'm not sure this is really a driving factor. Touch screens have marketing appeal (at least from the seller's perspective), I have to think having a shiny touch screen on your new Mazda is simply just trying to get more people to purchase a new car and nothing more.
  - smackay 7y ago
    There are lots of wires and connectors that come with mechanical controls. Everything need to be certified to make sure you don't have a recall of a million or two vehicles because the air-conditioning dials break after 6 months. All that must be crazy expensive compared to solid state electronics.
    - JangoSteve 7y ago
stcredzero 7y ago
> Audi, for instance has said that part of the reason it’s discontinuing its rotary controller is that a touchscreen better supports Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. Sturdy rotary controls which really are knobs are much better for a car. If you're on a bumpy road, the axis of the control will stabilize your hand. The controlling motion (twisting) can be more easily controlled, even if the bumps are trying to move your hand up and down. (I never see cars on the highway rapidly rotate about their roll axis more than 10 degrees. This only happens in Fast and Furious movies.) Furthermore, the feedback necessary to get from the control is all tactile. Contrast this with a slider control. An up/down slider is bad, because the control movement is in line with the direction of the bumps. Even a left/right slider has some problems with this, if your arm isn't perpendicular with the control. Contrast all of the above with controls on a touchscreen. Almost all of the feedback is visual. Simply registering your hand on the control requires visual feedback. There is almost no physical stabilization of your hand in bumpy conditions. Instead, you have to compensate with a hand/eye feedback loop, which requires even more visual attention.
ghostbrainalpha 7y ago
This is exactly what got me into modding Mechanical Keyboards. There is no reason that I NEED to launch Spotify from an actual switch controller... https://www.alliedelec.com/product/electroswitch-inc-/6600/70152263/?gclid=Cj0KCQjw9JzoBRDjARIsAGcdIDVZ9jYSoxaQCgVT5rHK_xe4Xx02ZnqAExtj2i_XOc5F0u9o-GpjafUaArkeEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds https://www.alliedelec.com/product/electroswitch-inc-/6600/7... But it feels so much better to control inputs with hardware. And rotary dials for volume, and many tasks in photoshop are infinitely superior.
- mch82 7y ago
  Also fun to use an Arduino Leonardo to create custom input devices that are understood to be USB keyboards/mice!
option 7y ago
I was renting a 2018 car on vacation with apple car play and was very pleasantly surprised how good experience is. For comparison, I own the same maxed-out but 2017 car without a carplay. Apple Carplay is so much better then car manufacturers system in every respect I tried (disclaimer: I did work for Apple but several years ago and on unrelated projects)
Zenst 7y ago
I totally agree. I recall the Blackberry with jog-wheel (non-touch screen), worked great, could scroll at a speed I liked, easy, one handed navigation of email, joy. Then they dropped that for the mini trackball, which they introduced with the pearl (a break into a consumer market). This was a mistake IMHO, and from a business users perspective, they sacrificed business users reaching for a consumer market that the likes of Apple did better. Their again, many examples of not the best design happening as the consensus of public know how to use it. QWERTY keyboard layouts being classic example. Then consoles and the mouse+keyboard combo over a game-controller pad. For FPS, mouse wins for ease of control still for me. But the big takeaway for me about physical buttons over virtual touch-screen ones is the ability to leverage muscle memory. With physical buttons, you know were they are, how they feel and can do that without looking. Bit like sending a text from a nokia phone whilst it's in your coat pocket. Try doing that with a touch-screen based phone. Whilst not an everyday use, it does highlight the advantages of buttons in some uses. Now, there is work ongoing in haptic feedback and some impressive work in the field of using ultrasound to create virtual surfaces you can feel. Which for many I'm sure will be great, but then the whole KISS design philosophy has somewhat taken a backseat in the name of features. But then, features are what sells many tech items today as they are still evolving. But there will always be people who prefer actual buttons. More so if you have ever been in a lift with a touch screen instead of buttons, which is something not to be sneezed at, literally unless you want to visit extra floors.
api 7y ago
> This decision is 100% business driven It's 100% fad driven. Expect block chain in a car at some point because the future.
naikrovek 7y ago
A screen with effectively infinite "soft buttons" is a hell of a lot cheaper than an equivalent amount of automotive grade pushbuttons. Initially this was done to save cost, but lately it's removed a severe and justified roadblock to the addition of useless features, IMO.
celticmusic 7y ago
a thousand times this. A year or two ago I considered buying another car after I had a fedex semi hit me (turning left from a stop, not dangerous). I drive a 2004 corolla and love toyota, but the guy looked at me like I had grown frog legs when I asked if they had any models without the touchscreen. It was actually a major decision in me keeping my vehicle. I do NOT like the touchscreen, to me it's a complete no-brainer that it's more dangerous. I sure as shit don't want to be clicking through crap while driving. When I was in HS I had a friend whose family had a couple of toyota vehicles. One of them was a small orange truck from the 70's I think. That thing looked like absolute crap, but ran beautifully. The only thing that finally killed that vehicle was their son going around a curve too quickly in the rain and rolling it. It's why I decided to buy toyota and I'm 100% happy with it. But this touchscreen issue is a big enough issue in my mind that I may start researching Mazda. I seriously do not want a damned touchscreen in my car.
- blacksmith_tb 7y ago
  The giant but not very useful 11in touchscreen in my 2017 Toyota Prius Prime can just be turned off. No really vital functions live in there, it's mostly the (iffy) GPS and settings like the audio source, which I don't need to change much. Almost all the normal things, like temp, lights, cruise etc. are still accessible via physical controls.
  - celticmusic 7y ago
    I think the big one for me would be radio and temp. I assume no one in their right mind would put lights or cruise control behind a touch screen, but I could be wrong there. And maybe part of it is me being set in my old man ways, but I don't want a touch screen for any of that. Probably the only 2 things I can see being useful on that screen are the reverse camera and GPS that talks to you and you can glance at it occasionally. Anything else should have real controls.
    - Rebelgecko 7y ago
      I think Teslas make you use the touchscreen for adjusting the cruise control speed
CWuestefeld 7y ago
The stakes are much lower, but the same complaints apply to media center remote controls. Recently my Logitech Harmony ONE died, and I replaced it with their current high-end device. I HATE it. I want to be looking at the TV when using it, not shifting attention to the remote's touch screen. Worse, the remote wants to support lots of controls, which it implements by allowing a swipe between pages. But it's way too easy to accidentally change pages, and the pages are all different kinds of things, so it's not clear how to swipe back to the one you want. So I took the $100+ device and threw it in the closet. I bought their 665 model, which is a big "peanut" form factor. It has all physical buttons, except four are located on the edge of an LCD screen. But that's not a touch screen, it's just for labeling purposes. All the buttons on the device are physical. This $50 device is so much easier to use than it's big brother.
- Yhippa 7y ago
  Related to my other comment on this article here, I bought the new device which came with the Harmony Hub. Once I connected it to my Google Assistant, I haven't looked back.
vchak1 7y ago
From a user experience perspective, it seems strange to me that one would only consider the driver experience and not include the passenger. I 100% agree with you about the need for tactile non distracting controls for the driver. At the same time carplay controlled by the passengers phone has a lot of value in terms of value add to passengers.
- c0vfefe 7y ago
  This may be true, but in terms of priority, I'd estimate that a car carries multiple people only 5-10% of the time it's used.
- svachalek 7y ago
  In the case of being driven by the passenger's phone, there's no need for a touchscreen in the car itself.
Reedx 7y ago
Agree with this for now, but what about when we're no longer driving the car? When that happens a touchscreen and the ability to play games/etc makes a lot of sense. I think what Tesla and others are doing is designing and preparing for the future. Although not ideal right now, they'll be far ahead of Mazda when we transition to self-driving cars.
- ufmace 7y ago
  In order to do that, we're also going to need tens of thousands of dollars worth of additional hardware - high-end weatherproof sensors, and full-range actuators for all controls with enough authority to use all of the power the car has. Not to mention whatever pile of computers and software is needed. Changing out the UI so you can play games a little better seems like a sidenote beside that.
riantogo 7y ago
Here is a counter anecdote. Recently I moved from BMW (buttons and dials) to Tesla Model 3 (basically a big iPad bolted on to the dash). Both me, my wife, bunch of friends with Model 3, all vastly prefer the touch screen experience.
- giaour 7y ago
  Counter-counter point: I much prefer the BMW interface because I can find the volume and AC controls without taking my eyes off the road.
  - CrazyStat 7y ago
    Good thing Tesla has both of those on the steering wheel so that the driver can find them without taking their eyes off the road or their hands off the wheel. Meantime the passenger can enjoy the touchscreen.
jackcviers3 7y ago
I vastly prefer my touchscreen to analog controls - how the heck would I control my map and nav and radio without an interface that can change at need?
mirimir 7y ago
I've never driven a car with a touchscreen. And I wouldn't want one for basic controls. Once I become familiar with old-school control locations, I don't need to look away from the road to make adjustments. And damn, I got pulled over once for suspicion of drunk driving, in my wife's car. In the process of finding some knob, I had drifted out of the lane. Anyway, heads-up is a great alternative. I look forward to lots of cool AR.
carbine 7y ago
I own a Mazda that has this touchscreen and I use it to set nav destinations, but otherwise I rely totally on the analog controls. Typing with analog dials can be a nightmare though so I hope they sort this out -- my mother's Audi makes you type with analog controls and it makes me want to pull my hair out. Good luck setting a destination when you're in a hurry.
IOT_Apprentice 7y ago
Mazda and other automakers build TRULY AWFUL UIs in their cars. Carplay is a godsend in this case. You can direct Siri to send texts, read texts and you have a superior GPS application. CHeck out the abomination that it Mercedes-Benz carousel for showing/selecting radio stations on their cars. What you are really advocating is tactile feedback for digital displays--with some method of shaped feedback on by the screen itself. As a touch screen's in cars don't offer haptic feedback, that is an issue. That said some aspects like moving up and down stations or songs in a playlist can be controlled by steering wheel paddles or buttons on the wheel.
- gnopgnip 7y ago
  The 2019 mazda 3 without the touchscreen still has carplay and android auto. You can still do all of that. You control it with the "commmander switch" instead of a touch screen, and more often with the volume knob or buttons on the wheel for the most common tasks.
madrox 7y ago
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I have no problem with touch screens in cars. My problem with is with the horrible UI those touch screens provide. They're slow to respond and don't seem well reasoned for the functions it has. It's why I love Carplay. It expands the function of the car in a needed way. Maybe analog controls are better, but interface matters less to me than function.
ChuckMcM 7y ago
I too am glad Mazda did this, now I have to decide if I want to trade in my 2018 Mazda 3 for a 2019 one :-). Touch screens are cheap, mechanical switches are expensive. Mechanicals are expensive from an acquisition cost, tooling/manufacturing cost, maintenance cost, and replacement cost. So automakers were happy to move everything into the touch screen and reduce these costs and boost their margin. I hope Mazda will be able to hold this line with their accountants.
- ec109685 7y ago
  How much do mechanical switches cost?
  - ChuckMcM 7y ago
    Depends, are they custom or off the shelf? Are they environmentally sealed or open? How many cycles do they need to last for? What sort of conditioning circuitry do they need? There will always be the cost of additional wiring harness and copper wire at some cost per foot. Some additional testing time when the consoles are assembled to verify the switches are all working Etc. Time has a cost associated with it during assembly as well.
brightball 7y ago
I understand your reasoning, but for me after having used Car Play in my wife's vehicle...it was a major factor in my car shopping experience. I spend a lot more time getting things set "just right" on my phone than I ever will on my car. Being able to hop in and have Waze, Google Maps, Pandora "just work" and be easily accessible rather than some built in system within the car that's going to just "check a box"...it's night and day. Car Play was so far above anything I've seen in a vehicle before that I actually miss it when it's not there. I can understand the preference for analog controls though. It will be interesting to see how it pans out.
rconti 7y ago
Have you ever used iDrive? I've been using it in cars occasionally for at least 10 years and it still confuses me. I just bought my first vehicle with it yesterday, so maybe I'll get better at it. Touchscreens are not great in cars but if you can perform the action quickly, it beats fiddling with a knob for 15 seconds.
- tcfunk 7y ago
  Does it? I can locate and adjust a knob without ever taking my eyes off the road. The same can't be said for a touchscreen.
  - rconti 7y ago
    You didn't answer the iDrive question. I can find and fiddle with the knob/control, but I still need to look at the screen to figure out what actually happened. It's not like a simple volume knob which I can do without looking. IOW a well-designed touchscreen UI can be better than a poorly designed non-touchscreen UI. And, unfortunately, most car infotainment systems are poorly-designed.
TomVDB 7y ago
> This to me is insane reasoning. That is no way user centric. This decision is 100% business driven and has nothing to do with the end user. I absolutely hate user interface of my Audio (with rotary knob and without touch screen), so I use CarPlay pretty much exclusively. I would love to be able to use a touch screen on that for some of the interactions. > It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. You can't expect that all car markers will develop a good branded interface, just like most Android phone makers have a UI that's worse than the standard Android one. With CarPlay, I get to use a UI from a company that's an expert a making good apps.
scotu 7y ago
It makes prefect sense: the whole automotive industry has a terrible track record for ui/ux in the non-driving parts of the cars because they don't care about it enough to put the effort in. So they outsource to Apple and Google that made a, frankly, even with touchscreens, better system then what car manifacturers would have ever produced. Now the problem is that Apple and Google had a hammer and treated the problem like it was a nail when it was not...
luisaguimaraes 7y ago
Exactly! there's no place for a touchscreen in the car, although many drivers don't know it:/
pbreit 7y ago
Hopefully you were able to grasp the need for touch screens on mobile devices. Same for cars.
rhizome 7y ago
Hah. My car is a 2008, older than most in-car technologies, but when I've thought about replacing it, a big click-knob was going to be a #1 requirement. It just seemed like a mousewheel for car: an instant classic.
m463 7y ago
I will say that navigation to an address is much much better with an on-screen keyboard. It is a uniformly HORRIBLE experience with buttons and knobs. Maybe the endgame should be voice, but that can be hit or miss too.
petre 7y ago
Mazda's touch screen is far away up on the dashboard while other brands like Citroen or Tesla place it between the driver and passenger, so it's easily operated by both. I like both Audi's rotary controller and touch screens. Both are a distraction to the driver because you have to navigate menus, not particulary because of the interface. Seat also has a touchscreen and it's a VW brand.
didibus 7y ago
I'm not buying a car with no touch screen. I like to have physical buttons for AC, and quick switching between media, radio, a dial for volume, things like that. But I also need a touch screen for Google Maps, and my music apps. Often times, my passenger might navigate these. Edit: Also, in all fairness, where the screen is relative to the dash matters, and the size of it as well. From the photos on the post, those Mazda touch screens looked pretty small and awkwardly positioned for touch controls.
GVIrish 7y ago
> Audi, for instance has said that part of the reason it’s discontinuing its rotary controller is that a touchscreen better supports Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. The baffling thing about that is that Audi's MMI system was actually pretty darned good. And a few of the cars support controlling Apple Carplay with the rotary dial. Audi and BMW used to sell their dial interfaces as a unique advantage over touchscreen only infotainment systems. It blows my mind that they're (Audi at least) going in the opposite direction now.
breakyerself 7y ago
I like my touch screen. There is a lot I can do on it without much distraction. If something is in a sub menu that takes more than a fraction of a second to get to then I wait until I'm on a straight away that autopilot can handle and do it while I'm on autopilot.
jsight 7y ago
> This to me is insane reasoning. That is no way user centric. This decision is 100% business driven and has nothing to do with the end user. It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. This is really wrong. People were begging Mazda to add Android Auto and Apple CarPlay for years and they have only just recently added them. Adding these features has everything to do with what people want. Android Auto is pretty amazing, and is steadily getting better as well.
jrochkind1 7y ago
> Many studies I conducted actually told me that people favored analog controls over digital touch screens controls. It gives you tactile feedback, making it accessible for anyone with sense of touch. I assumed this was widely known (because of COURSE we do), but the digital touch screens were CHEAPER than dedicated physical controls for all desired functions. To design as well as to mass produce.
zerd 7y ago
Same reason I hate the MacBook TouchBar. It distracts, requires looking at it, does not give good feedback and is context dependent (buttons move around).
tracker1 7y ago
I've hated touch screens in cars... I generally rely on bluetooth, only because the controls are so bad, at least with BT I can pick up my phone and bring it into view if needed, but the steering controls handle next navigation, which along with volume are about 95% of interactivity. The other 5% being maps. If the Mazda navigation/interaction/entertainment experience is better, I'm definitely in favor. I miss the in-between period, where I could just insert a USB drive with sorted directories of mp3s and use that easily.
smsm42 7y ago
> This to me is insane reasoning. Not insane but highly cynical. They are increasing risk to my - their user's - life in order to save some bucks on R&D and integration investment. Does it make you wonder where else did the make the same tradeoff? It should. > I hope other brands start following Mazda again for this choice. Same here. When I buy my next car, I would ensure it doesn't have controls that require me to be distracted from driving to operate even the most basic functions.

cm2187 7y ago

Agree, except when you need to type a name.

gambiting 7y ago
Then MB/BMW approach of having a touchpad near your wrist is perfect - you can draw letters with your finger without having to worry about hitting miniscule letters on the screen.
- majewsky 7y ago
  Do they have a second touchpad for us lefties?
  - gambiting 7y ago
    Well, I'm in the UK so I have to use it with my left hand even though I am right handed - it works fine. Because the letter recognition is based on a single letter at a time it works fine even if I make an absolute mess of it with my left hand.
marapuru 7y ago
When you need to type a full name. Having a keyboard present could give a huge advantage. This is not equal to having a touch screen. Next to that, my car has a system where you choose 1 letter and only the next possibility pops up. It decreases the need of a full keyboard. It's quite likely you only need to choose the first 3 to 4 letters.
- rockinghigh 7y ago
  I wonder if you’ve used Tesla’s touchscreen or even Apple CarPlay with a touchscreen and Google Maps. You only seem to mention these old UIs. The rotary control on a virtual keyboard is atrocious to type addresses and points of interest.
- llampx 7y ago
  I would actually like a stronger integration with the phone for cases like this. If you need directions, just load it up on google maps and send it to your car. If you need to pull up a playlist, same thing. Of course if you are driving this should be done by the passenger.

_Codemonkeyism 7y ago

Touch screens in cars are the equivalent of shiny phones. They persuade people to buy and some of them might love them. Nearly every phone I see has a protector around it, destroying the nice looking design because one drop and it breaks. But you still need to have shiny designed phones or you won't sell them. So cudos to Mazda. I wonder if they can keep this policy up when everyone else has shiny large touchscreens.

grey-area 7y ago

All these tactile controls are going to be deleted in the next decade as self driving cars go mainstream. This is a foolish move.

benj111 7y ago
Should there be an /s tag in there somewhere? I can't tell.
SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
Last time I was in a cab it had controls in the back for the AC, a light, the windows etc. - just because I'm not driving doesn't mean I don't want to interact with the car at all.
- pbhjpbhj 7y ago
  But you don't need to interact with the car without looking, that's only for those driving, so tactile interfaces don't give much/any gain.
dwighttk 7y ago
Decade? Psh... Elon says 6-18 months!
- grey-area 7y ago
  Elon Musk is, as usual, right but with the wrong timing.

beambot 7y ago

Care to elaborate on your studies? Not many cars have gone full touchscreen. I grant you that it took a bit of getting used to on my Tesla, but now I'd never want to go back. Curious how you controller for familiarity in your studies.

quakenul 7y ago

> As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars The flexibility to benefit from rapid product iteration. If you think of cars as mostly software products that receive updates over the air, a flexible interface makes a lot more sense (even though I agree that it makes for a pretty bad user interface).

JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
If we extend this idea, why not do it for airplanes? It seems like a bad idea to be changing the layout of mission-critical systems. I'm sure it'd wreak havoc if the cockpit of a 787 was all touch screens, with UI changes pushed at the whim of developers. I drive a car with analog controls. The buttons for controlling the radio, hazard lights, the A/C, etc are all static. I wouldn't want it to change. It gets the job done; it doesn't need iteration, and messing with it would reduce safety. I don't have to look at the controls, because the buttons are of various shapes/sizes that I know. Tactile feedback is value in keeping eyes on the road.
- Isinlor 7y ago
  How about spacecraft with touchscreens: https://www.spacex.com/crew-dragon https://www.spacex.com/crew-dragon ? Compare to the cockpit of Space Shuttle: https://i.redd.it/9mj5bcbnzsx21.jpg https://i.redd.it/9mj5bcbnzsx21.jpg
  - Phillipharryt 7y ago
    I hope you're arguing in favour of the space shuttle there. It has no contextual buttons. I'll always argue that contextual controls do not belong in critical systems. Every button on that shuttle will do the same thing every time you press it. A touch screen looks nice but isn't safe. Mission control is telling you to press X button, but X button isn't actually on your display right now?? That's a big problem.
    - Aser 7y ago

youngtaff 7y ago

In my Mazda, above 5MPH the touchscreen doesn't respond to touch any more and you need to use the rotary controller (which is good as muscle memory allows you to use it effectively)

dzhiurgis 7y ago

They should put screen tactile screen feedback into seat...

hrktb 7y ago

> As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars. For me there is two different scenarii for controlling the car: - while driving quick adjustments: volume up/volume down, temperature control, play/stop/skip music, start/stop navigation. All of those should be via easy to understand, direct access physical controls. - while parked (or by a passanger): navigation setting, app switching, playlist adjustments, peripherals setup, air control strategies, anything finicky really. I see a case for these operations to be done by a touchscreen with no physical equivalent. Physical controls for those are juste hell most of the time. In that sense, I feel Mazda is just throwing the towel when a more sensible and best of both world approach could be taken.

neogodless 7y ago
In the 2015 Mazda I drive, they allow touch under 5 mph (I think?) But I installed Android Auto using third-party/open source software (and touch is always-on.) By default on your phone, plugged into the car, you have to swipe/unlock Android Auto, but if you're parked, you can do that, and access your apps, including Google Maps. You can set your destination, and it immediately opens on the car screen. I'm completely fine with this model of interface - when parked, use your phone. However, having said all that, if you still want to use a wheel, it's important they hit the right UI. In a BMW I rented, the way it only showed relevant letters while searching for an address (using the wheel) was pretty good and I was able to type in an address surprisingly quickly, even on my first time of using the software. Probably still not quite as quick as using a touch screen, but close enough. I suspect that when you allow touchscreen as your fallback, it's harder to be "really good" about making a good wheel + button UI. It's too easy to lean on your crutch.

Fnoord 7y ago

> As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars. For years I have been working on product interfaces (not just apps). How does this relate to Apple Magic Trackpad with Force Touch?

Fnoord 7y ago
Sorry, I badly quoted there. Was meant to quote this: > Many studies I conducted actually told me that people favored analog controls over digital touch screens controls. It gives you tactile feedback, making it accessible for anyone with sense of touch. Given that Force Touch give a form of feedback (haptic though), isn't that good enough? How many people believe that the Force Touch gives tactile feedback instead of haptic?

JulianMorrison 7y ago

Everyone wanted to be Star Trek The Next Generation and/or Minority Report. That is the reality of it. Shiny futurist magic finger-wavy interfaces. Which were designed to look as cool as possible in movies and not on the basis of practical affordance.

yellowapple 7y ago
At least in TNG the voice recognition software (more-or-less) reliably understood what the user was saying.

thrower123 7y ago

Hopefully this is a trend that catches on; I was resolved to never buy a vehicle that had touch screen controls in it, after seeing what a mess Ford had made with the UX in my wife's 2019 Edge, compared to what I have in my 2010 F150. I think touchscreens are dangerous as hell to have in vehicles, because you cannot operate them by feel alone, like you can with a buttons and knobs interface. People are distracted enough playing on their phones while they drive, so selfishly for my own safety, I don't really want them futzing around with the janky touchscreen display to change the radio or mess with the air conditioning too.

practice9 7y ago

You would reconsider your point of view if you have seen some truly evil UIs using rotary controls. Worst thing is when you need a manual to understand how the thing works, and manual DOES NOT specify all the options. I, as user, would prefer a large touch screen for changing settings and navigating, and several programmable analog buttons for when I'm driving. Rotary controllers are evil.

mrmonkeyman 7y ago
My mazda's rotary controller is heaven on earth thank you very much.

agumonkey 7y ago

Can't wait for pocket computers to follow too.

jordache 7y ago
nope! touch sscreen UI has safety implications inside a motor vehicle. pocket computer's usage scope is way broader than inside a car, and you REQUIRE the infinite UI possibility provided by a pure touch interface
- agumonkey 7y ago
  Still a massive limitation to be expected to use the device eyes on and high attention. I get that this is the trend but it's still not a good qualitative point.
  - jordache 7y ago
    in the context of an automotive interface, I agree with you touch UI is not the best. I was responding to general purpose computing (smartphone) that the OP was referring to.

nova22033 7y ago

>It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. Or, people actually like CarPlay and Android Auto and audi would have to spend a lot of money to keep up. Newer audis already support CarPlay. They're only switching from a rotary controller to a touch screen.

6thaccount2 7y ago

Makes me tempted to buy a Mazda. I like the AWD and reliability of a Suburu, but their touch screens are absolute garbage and going from my analog 6-disc changing Honda Accord to driving the much newer Subaru is painful.

nradov 7y ago
I recently bought a new Subaru. It has regular buttons and dials on the dashboard and steering wheel for all the important stuff. The touch screen works fine with Android Auto.
- brokenmachine 7y ago
  That sounds like a nice setup.

fsagx 7y ago

Mazda (at least my Mazda6 from a few years ago) can do this because they have a great interface to the entertainment/info system. They have a joystick with a few mouse-like buttons on the center console just behind the gear shift. It's very easy to do common tasks like change volume, change station, skip to next in playlist without taking eyes off the road. My wife actually didn't realize for more than a year that the screen was a touch screen. She had never had to use it.

albeec13 7y ago
Yup, agree 100%. We bought a 2014 Mazda 6, and while it has a touch screen, I find myself only using the control knob 99% of the time. It's vastly superior to any touchscreen interface I've ever used, and also far better than some of the mouse-like joysticks in some cars (think later 201X Lexus vehicles and such).

loudtieblahblah 7y ago

public reason: safety. Private reason: we want total voice controlled system so we can listen to everything you say & do in car, log it and get into the ad and analytics business. One step at a time well be here.

giancarlostoro 7y ago

When my iPod Classic died it really stung especially since they discontinued them. I hate playing music on my phone. I cant skip songs or pause without looking properly if I am on an aux cable. Sure Bluetooth is a thing but you dont always drive your own car and every car has their own convoluted way to do Bluetooth. I wish Android or iPhones had multimedia related buttons somewhere on them (dont miss that lock button / slider thing Apple used to add in so you dont butt skip a song). It is much safer for me to feel out specific buttons while driving than looking down on my phone screen.

oauea 7y ago
You can skip tracks by long pressing the volume keys if you configure it: https://www.xda-developers.com/skip-music-tracks-android-volume-keys-no-root/ https://www.xda-developers.com/skip-music-tracks-android-vol...
- moftz 7y ago
  This used to be a stock feature in a lot of phones. I haven't had a phone that did this since my HTC Droid Incredible back in 2011.
- giancarlostoro 7y ago
  I tried to figure out how to do this a number of times, but never saw a clear answer. I might try it next time I'm driving around.
dreamcompiler 7y ago
Not to mention that the on-the-go playlist feature worked great on iPods (just hold the button down) but Apple still hasn't figured that out on iPhones. Agree that Bluetooth is a nightmare. Every Bluetooth radio wants to dig into my phone and download my contacts (and who knows what else) but all I want to do is play music. If I do this in a rental car I have to remember to figure out how to wipe the radio when I'm returning the car and already rushing to catch a plane, so I don't even bother with Bluetooth any more. It's maddening.

rockinghigh 7y ago

I have used Audi’s version of CarPlay without a touchscreen and I hated it. Circling through icons that were designed for a touch interface made no sense. Tesla’s interface is not perfect but interacting with the map is so much better with its large touchscreen.

higginsc 7y ago
Yep. I recently spent a day driving an S5 and S6, and the non-touchscreen carplay was terrible. I have a touchscreen version in my 2017 CR-V, and it is a joy to use. I read the comments in this thread, and it makes me laugh. So much "TOUCHSCREENS ARE THE DEVIL, NOBS AND BUTTONS ONLY." It just doesn't jive with my experience at all. Maybe it's a generation gap thing? I'm 30 FWIW.
- Fins 7y ago
  Possibly. If the only thing you're used to and expect is a touchscreen, you will long for a touchscreen even when it is objectively a worse experience. Seriously... I've seen people right here on HN claiming that "look, navigate to a touch menu, navigate to another menu, select an item, press and hold" is superior to "press one button on the door".

aphextim 7y ago

I have an older Sebring from 2010 with only 25k miles on it I was able to snag up for a good deal. Was a nicer 'limited' one so it still had a newer touch screen console. It is annoying as you touch it once to 'activate' it and then have to tap the screen a second time to register the press on whatever button/input you were trying to touch. No tactile feedback and having to press it twice and visually check to make sure the input you wanted worked. It is much more time consuming/distracting than an older vehicle in my personal experience.

gingabriska 7y ago

Whole windshield should a screen and we should be able to just wave at it to perform operation or simply talk to it.

GrumpyNl 7y ago
You cant wave at it, two hands on the wheel:)

rco8786 7y ago

As a counter point - we’re already seeing the role of the driver fading away from car travel. lane holding tech is readily available in your average car now. Tesla’s can drive themselves a large portion of the time. Etc. Concerns about tactile feedback and such don’t really matter if you don’t have to pay attention to the road anymore. As we’ve seen play out with phones, people vastly prefer touch screens and vastly prefer familiarity. Standardizing cars across a couple of different interfaces vs each car having a brand new layout of analog switches, knobs, and doo-hickeys is a much better rider experience. Much like how a “phone” went from “a device to call someone on” to what an iPhone does today, a “car” is going from “something you drive” to just another device you interact with in various ways and it also happens to be able to get you from point A to point B.

jodrellblank 7y ago
people vastly prefer touch screens Do they? A car's dashboard doesn't have to be small enough to fit in your pocket; it doesn't have a screen you want to look at constantly where there's a direct trade-off between screen space and physical keyboard space; a car's dashboard doesn't have limits of where buttons can be because you have to hold it around the edges without pressing the buttons accidentally. I still hate typing with on-screen keyboards, I just grudgingly accept that for a given small phone size, I'd prefer more of it to be screen than keyboard. That doesn't at all mean I want my car to turn into an Android tablet because I prefer a touchscreen in the constraints of a pocket size device.
- bumby 7y ago
  If people really do vastly prefer touch screens, I would expect to see different control mechanisms moving in this direction (steering, shifting, etc.) The fact that they aren't going this way in the systems that __really__ matter seems to indicate that people don't really prefer touch screens.
  - rco8786 7y ago
    Come on. My iPhone still has some tactile mechanisms also. But 99% of my interactions with it are via touch screen. That's what you're describing.

aledthemathguy 7y ago

> As a User Experience Professional May I politely ask - what exactly do you learn to be a UEP (pardon the abbreviation)?

EastSmith 7y ago

Agreed. I've been using touch car interface for the last 5 years (Chevy). I basically do two things: - Bluetooth connect - listen to spotify _from_ my phone / listen to map directions _from_ my phone. I rarely use the touch interface - I am switching tracks either using the buttons on the wheel (most of the time), or using the phone. Also, I do not want another yet another "kind of familiar but different" interface like most of the car touch control systems. I want the interface on my phone, that's it.

jforman 7y ago

> It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. The one piece of feedback I gave Toyota in their post-purchase survey is: please replace the hot mess that is Entune with CarPlay. They absolutely should give up. You can't compete with an OS and ecosystem into which billions of dollars have been sunk. I agree, for what it's worth, that analog controls are superior to touch controls while driving. I hate that Toyota replaced an audio dial with a touch up/down control. But the value of CarPlay is just way too high.

justin66 7y ago
Isn't CarPlay exclusive to iOS devices? If so, what you're describing might be viable with Lexus. It'd be somewhat pointless with the Toyota brand, where iOS users are a rather small minority.
- galangalalgol 7y ago
  Seriously? People will have the newest iPhone before they shell out for a car with a working air conditioner. The car is gone as a status symbol, the phone is now arrived.
  - justin66 7y ago
    We know that iPhone enjoys a minority of smartphone market share, and we know that Lexus is the luxury brand and Toyota is the everyday brand. One assumes iPhone will be overrepresented among Lexus buyers and underrepresented among Toyota buyers. Therefore it would make very little sense for the Toyota brand to abandon Android users in favor of iOS users in the design of its dashboard systems.
    - galangalalgol 7y ago
      I wasn't suggesting they ditch android auto, but literally everyone but Mazda and Toyota have carplay as an option. Even Kia and Hyundai. Chevy,GMC,ford,Dodge, Chrysler,jeep,Fiat,Nissan, Honda, Mitsubishi. All have carplay. Mazda is going simple, which I respect. I drive a Miata pre touchscreen and I use a $50 Android phone. But to have a touchscreen an not have android auto and carplay? Why?

ubermonkey 7y ago

>As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars. Before phone integration, I might've agreed with you, or at least had no opinion on the subject. After watching many car companies, even high-end ones like BMW and Mercedes, fail utterly at producing reasonable phone integration systems or interfaces, though, I'm all-in on CarPlay. >It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. Correct. They have given up, and it's good that they have, because they've all proven they absolutely suck at it. In the meantime, Apple and Google (?) have done it for them, at least as far as the phone goes. (I assume the Android equivalent is equally good; no reason it shouldn't be.) >This to me is insane reasoning. That is no way user centric. I think it really IS, though. CarPlay is amazingly good, and only really works well with a touchscreen. At this point, it would be very hard for me to buy a car that didn't have CarPlay integration with a touchscreen. I've seen implementations without touch, and they're much, much less useful. I do agree, though, that touchscreens beyond phone interfaces should be used very sparingly. The Tesla's all-touchscreen situation in particular seems like a terrible idea. Most of us are used to being able to adjust the AC without looking, and that's only possible because there are physical controls we can feel. But the phone interface is distinct from that, and needs to be a touchscreen. When it's not, or when it's not present, people just pick up their phones and use them, which is worse.

fatnoah 7y ago
>I've seen implementations without touch, and they're much, much less useful. I have this. I never use it. Instead, I mount my phone next to the screen and use Android Auto on my phone. Using the rotary dial and other buttons is a) far more difficult and b) far more distracting while driving. An action that takes 1 second with a touch requires several seconds of fumbling with a knob and buttons w/out touch.
- xx_alpha_xx 7y ago
  But the important different IMHO is that a knob / buttons don't require you to take your eyes off the road. In that 1 second you look down, you could cause an accident due to inattention.

michaelt 7y ago

As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars. Stage 1: We need a touchscreen so we can show a keyboard for sat nav address entry. Stage 2: Well, given that we've got this touchscreen, we might as well use it for.....

Spooky23 7y ago

Of course it's not user centric. It's about capturing more revenue while limited the parts in the car. Back in the day, you had modular radio mounts. Ford broke the mold with the Ford Taurus and the integrated controls that you couldn't replace. Now, if you care about a nice radio in your car, you need to upgrade your entire car for $5k. I have an otherwise awesome Honda Pilot with a built in, unsupported android tablet that doesn't support carplay or android auto, and is hard to replace without heavy hackery because core controls of the car are built into the tablet.

lhorie 7y ago

Have you tried inputting directions into a car GPS using rotary controls? It's reminiscent of old rotary phones and IMHO a terrible UX

Fins 7y ago
Better than touchscreen, though, especially when moving (only doing it as a passenger, of course!)
- lhorie 7y ago
  Having used both, I vastly prefer the touchscreen. The rotary input takes way longer to navigate to the next letter, and it's easier to make mistakes (e.g. accidentally switching modes) and it's harder to fix them (need to cycle all the way to the end to hit backspace, sometimes having to start from scratch if your mistake was "jump out of input mode")
  - Fins 7y ago
    I've tried Android Auto in a Sonata with touch screen, and Passat and a Q5 with rotary controller. The latter were far easier to use, once you've spent 5 minutes making sure you understand how it works. Maybe if the touch screen were Tesla-sized it would have been easier to use, but on a regular sized screen, even switching modes takes much more attention with a touch screen, because you need to look at it, move your hand to it, make sure you're hitting the correct location, wait until it registers,m make sure you've actually hit the right spot. With a rotary it was "slide down, no need to look because it clicks, click or two clockwise (still no need to look), push down, q
  - Fins 7y ago
    I've tried Android Auto in a Sonata with touch screen, and Passat and a Q5 with rotary controller. The latter were far easier to use, once you've spent 5 minutes making sure you understand how it works. Maybe if the touch screen were Tesla-sized it would have been easier to use, but on a regular sized screen, even switching modes takes much more attention with a touch screen, because you need to look at it, move your hand to it, make sure you're hitting the correct location, wait until it registers,m make sure you've actually hit the right spot. With a rotary it was "slide down, no need to look because it clicks, click or two clockwise (still no need to look), push down, quick glance that you're on the right screen, click clock- or counterclock-wise to select what you need. Much safer and easier, and you're not going to hit a wrong thing because you drove over a bump. For entering addresses a large touch screen is nicer, but then a keyboard is even better, but since you're only supposed to do that while parked, so hitting a wrong button shouldn't be a big problem.

habosa 7y ago

I think supporting Android Auto and CarPlay is pretty user centric. Those are the only half decent in-car interfaces I've ever used. Nothing else is close.

jbigelow76 7y ago

> Audi, for instance has said that part of the reason it’s discontinuing its rotary controller is that a touchscreen better supports Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. This to me is insane reasoning. That is no way user centric. This decision is 100% business driven and has nothing to do with the end user. That statement isn't true, Car Play support for me was a non-negotiable for the car I purchased two years ago. Another friend made Android Auto support a big factor in his decision and said he wouldn't buy another vehicle that didn't support it. From other conversations we don't seem to be outliers, that feature support is incredibly user(buyer) centric.

boboguitar 7y ago
> Car Play support for me was a non-negotiable for the car I purchased two years ago. It's a big point in my car buying decision just for the navigation experience alone.
Fins 7y ago
But you can do CarPlay/AAuto without the touchscreen idiocy.
- spookthesunset 7y ago
  Yes. At least with CarPlay you can use the knob thing on our Mazda and not use the touchscreen at all (which is disabled when the vehicle is in motion).

fuckyah 7y ago

yes i agree! i love bmw's wheel knob.

electriclove 7y ago

You've got to be kidding? Yes, the touchscreens on many/most of the cars out there are a horrible user experience. I've shared in that frustration. But just look to how Tesla has handled this to see what can be possible. It isn't perfect by any means but it is such an improvement to the user experience (being able to add buttons via the UI to enable new features, maps that respond quickly, etc). They still have analog controls for volume and other things. Touchscreens are here to stay. The user experience just needs to improve.

mbesto 7y ago

> It gives you tactile feedback, making it accessible for anyone with sense of touch. Tactile feedback is also a huge security benefit. This is what really doesn't make sense to me about the desire for touchscreens in cars - they're inherently dangerous.

saghm 7y ago

> That is no way user centric. This decision is 100% business driven and has nothing to do with the end user. It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. Genuinely curious: what does the interface being "branded" have to to with the user? To me, focusing on whether their interface is branded would be more business-driven rather than user-centric.

cbsmith 7y ago

> This to me is insane reasoning. That is no way user centric. This decision is 100% business driven and has nothing to do with the end user. It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. ...or figured out that you aren't as good at software as you are at building cars. Honestly, CarPlay/Auto have been a godsend for me. The navigation software works better than anything I get from car manufacturers and just keeping me from mucking with my phone is fantastic. That said... I'm not sure the touchscreen part of that is the real winner there for me.

grillvogel 7y ago

I have a newer subaru with a touchscreen and an older audi with the MMI rotary wheel. The rotary wheel is a superior interface, it has a slight learning curve, but then you do most operations by feel without needing to spend much time looking at the screen. the touch screen is finicky, and by definition requires you to take your eyes off the road to use it.

pwg 7y ago

> As a User Experience Professional, I was never able to grasp the true user's need for touch screens in cars. You are viewing the 'need' from the end user perspective. That is likely not the driving force that is causing touch screen proliferation. The likely driving force that is causing it is the manufacturers BOM costs. A single, rectangular, touch screen, that can swallow up a bunch of different knobs and buttons and basic displays, is likely cheaper from an overall BOM perspective than the set of knobs and buttons and basic displays (and supporting material (mechanical and wiring) for those knobs/buttons/displays). And, if two (or more) different car models use the same size rectangular screen, then one single "screen" can be used for plural models (with only software differences) vs. the need for unique moldings/buttons/etc. when providing the physical knobs and buttons on different models. The touch screen also enables different "accessory classes" even within the same model by a software change vs. a different piece of hardware. Think basic hot/cold/manual blower speed climate control vs. higher end climate control where you set a specific temp and the system picks heat/cool/blower speed. The same single touch screen can provide both the 'basic' and the 'luxury' interface via a software change vs. two different physical control units inserted into the dash.

TheGRS 7y ago
Are knobs and plastic moldings that expensive though? I'm not sure this is really a driving factor. Touch screens have marketing appeal (at least from the seller's perspective), I have to think having a shiny touch screen on your new Mazda is simply just trying to get more people to purchase a new car and nothing more.
- smackay 7y ago
  There are lots of wires and connectors that come with mechanical controls. Everything need to be certified to make sure you don't have a recall of a million or two vehicles because the air-conditioning dials break after 6 months. All that must be crazy expensive compared to solid state electronics.
  - JangoSteve 7y ago

stcredzero 7y ago

> Audi, for instance has said that part of the reason it’s discontinuing its rotary controller is that a touchscreen better supports Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. Sturdy rotary controls which really are knobs are much better for a car. If you're on a bumpy road, the axis of the control will stabilize your hand. The controlling motion (twisting) can be more easily controlled, even if the bumps are trying to move your hand up and down. (I never see cars on the highway rapidly rotate about their roll axis more than 10 degrees. This only happens in Fast and Furious movies.) Furthermore, the feedback necessary to get from the control is all tactile. Contrast this with a slider control. An up/down slider is bad, because the control movement is in line with the direction of the bumps. Even a left/right slider has some problems with this, if your arm isn't perpendicular with the control. Contrast all of the above with controls on a touchscreen. Almost all of the feedback is visual. Simply registering your hand on the control requires visual feedback. There is almost no physical stabilization of your hand in bumpy conditions. Instead, you have to compensate with a hand/eye feedback loop, which requires even more visual attention.

ghostbrainalpha 7y ago

This is exactly what got me into modding Mechanical Keyboards. There is no reason that I NEED to launch Spotify from an actual switch controller... https://www.alliedelec.com/product/electroswitch-inc-/6600/70152263/?gclid=Cj0KCQjw9JzoBRDjARIsAGcdIDVZ9jYSoxaQCgVT5rHK_xe4Xx02ZnqAExtj2i_XOc5F0u9o-GpjafUaArkeEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds https://www.alliedelec.com/product/electroswitch-inc-/6600/7... But it feels so much better to control inputs with hardware. And rotary dials for volume, and many tasks in photoshop are infinitely superior.

mch82 7y ago
Also fun to use an Arduino Leonardo to create custom input devices that are understood to be USB keyboards/mice!

option 7y ago

I was renting a 2018 car on vacation with apple car play and was very pleasantly surprised how good experience is. For comparison, I own the same maxed-out but 2017 car without a carplay. Apple Carplay is so much better then car manufacturers system in every respect I tried (disclaimer: I did work for Apple but several years ago and on unrelated projects)

Zenst 7y ago

I totally agree. I recall the Blackberry with jog-wheel (non-touch screen), worked great, could scroll at a speed I liked, easy, one handed navigation of email, joy. Then they dropped that for the mini trackball, which they introduced with the pearl (a break into a consumer market). This was a mistake IMHO, and from a business users perspective, they sacrificed business users reaching for a consumer market that the likes of Apple did better. Their again, many examples of not the best design happening as the consensus of public know how to use it. QWERTY keyboard layouts being classic example. Then consoles and the mouse+keyboard combo over a game-controller pad. For FPS, mouse wins for ease of control still for me. But the big takeaway for me about physical buttons over virtual touch-screen ones is the ability to leverage muscle memory. With physical buttons, you know were they are, how they feel and can do that without looking. Bit like sending a text from a nokia phone whilst it's in your coat pocket. Try doing that with a touch-screen based phone. Whilst not an everyday use, it does highlight the advantages of buttons in some uses. Now, there is work ongoing in haptic feedback and some impressive work in the field of using ultrasound to create virtual surfaces you can feel. Which for many I'm sure will be great, but then the whole KISS design philosophy has somewhat taken a backseat in the name of features. But then, features are what sells many tech items today as they are still evolving. But there will always be people who prefer actual buttons. More so if you have ever been in a lift with a touch screen instead of buttons, which is something not to be sneezed at, literally unless you want to visit extra floors.

api 7y ago

> This decision is 100% business driven It's 100% fad driven. Expect block chain in a car at some point because the future.

naikrovek 7y ago

A screen with effectively infinite "soft buttons" is a hell of a lot cheaper than an equivalent amount of automotive grade pushbuttons. Initially this was done to save cost, but lately it's removed a severe and justified roadblock to the addition of useless features, IMO.

celticmusic 7y ago

a thousand times this. A year or two ago I considered buying another car after I had a fedex semi hit me (turning left from a stop, not dangerous). I drive a 2004 corolla and love toyota, but the guy looked at me like I had grown frog legs when I asked if they had any models without the touchscreen. It was actually a major decision in me keeping my vehicle. I do NOT like the touchscreen, to me it's a complete no-brainer that it's more dangerous. I sure as shit don't want to be clicking through crap while driving. When I was in HS I had a friend whose family had a couple of toyota vehicles. One of them was a small orange truck from the 70's I think. That thing looked like absolute crap, but ran beautifully. The only thing that finally killed that vehicle was their son going around a curve too quickly in the rain and rolling it. It's why I decided to buy toyota and I'm 100% happy with it. But this touchscreen issue is a big enough issue in my mind that I may start researching Mazda. I seriously do not want a damned touchscreen in my car.

blacksmith_tb 7y ago
The giant but not very useful 11in touchscreen in my 2017 Toyota Prius Prime can just be turned off. No really vital functions live in there, it's mostly the (iffy) GPS and settings like the audio source, which I don't need to change much. Almost all the normal things, like temp, lights, cruise etc. are still accessible via physical controls.
- celticmusic 7y ago
  I think the big one for me would be radio and temp. I assume no one in their right mind would put lights or cruise control behind a touch screen, but I could be wrong there. And maybe part of it is me being set in my old man ways, but I don't want a touch screen for any of that. Probably the only 2 things I can see being useful on that screen are the reverse camera and GPS that talks to you and you can glance at it occasionally. Anything else should have real controls.
  - Rebelgecko 7y ago
    I think Teslas make you use the touchscreen for adjusting the cruise control speed

CWuestefeld 7y ago

The stakes are much lower, but the same complaints apply to media center remote controls. Recently my Logitech Harmony ONE died, and I replaced it with their current high-end device. I HATE it. I want to be looking at the TV when using it, not shifting attention to the remote's touch screen. Worse, the remote wants to support lots of controls, which it implements by allowing a swipe between pages. But it's way too easy to accidentally change pages, and the pages are all different kinds of things, so it's not clear how to swipe back to the one you want. So I took the $100+ device and threw it in the closet. I bought their 665 model, which is a big "peanut" form factor. It has all physical buttons, except four are located on the edge of an LCD screen. But that's not a touch screen, it's just for labeling purposes. All the buttons on the device are physical. This $50 device is so much easier to use than it's big brother.

Yhippa 7y ago
Related to my other comment on this article here, I bought the new device which came with the Harmony Hub. Once I connected it to my Google Assistant, I haven't looked back.

vchak1 7y ago

From a user experience perspective, it seems strange to me that one would only consider the driver experience and not include the passenger. I 100% agree with you about the need for tactile non distracting controls for the driver. At the same time carplay controlled by the passengers phone has a lot of value in terms of value add to passengers.

c0vfefe 7y ago
This may be true, but in terms of priority, I'd estimate that a car carries multiple people only 5-10% of the time it's used.
svachalek 7y ago
In the case of being driven by the passenger's phone, there's no need for a touchscreen in the car itself.

Reedx 7y ago

Agree with this for now, but what about when we're no longer driving the car? When that happens a touchscreen and the ability to play games/etc makes a lot of sense. I think what Tesla and others are doing is designing and preparing for the future. Although not ideal right now, they'll be far ahead of Mazda when we transition to self-driving cars.

ufmace 7y ago
In order to do that, we're also going to need tens of thousands of dollars worth of additional hardware - high-end weatherproof sensors, and full-range actuators for all controls with enough authority to use all of the power the car has. Not to mention whatever pile of computers and software is needed. Changing out the UI so you can play games a little better seems like a sidenote beside that.

riantogo 7y ago

Here is a counter anecdote. Recently I moved from BMW (buttons and dials) to Tesla Model 3 (basically a big iPad bolted on to the dash). Both me, my wife, bunch of friends with Model 3, all vastly prefer the touch screen experience.

giaour 7y ago
Counter-counter point: I much prefer the BMW interface because I can find the volume and AC controls without taking my eyes off the road.
- CrazyStat 7y ago
  Good thing Tesla has both of those on the steering wheel so that the driver can find them without taking their eyes off the road or their hands off the wheel. Meantime the passenger can enjoy the touchscreen.

jackcviers3 7y ago

I vastly prefer my touchscreen to analog controls - how the heck would I control my map and nav and radio without an interface that can change at need?

mirimir 7y ago

I've never driven a car with a touchscreen. And I wouldn't want one for basic controls. Once I become familiar with old-school control locations, I don't need to look away from the road to make adjustments. And damn, I got pulled over once for suspicion of drunk driving, in my wife's car. In the process of finding some knob, I had drifted out of the lane. Anyway, heads-up is a great alternative. I look forward to lots of cool AR.

carbine 7y ago

I own a Mazda that has this touchscreen and I use it to set nav destinations, but otherwise I rely totally on the analog controls. Typing with analog dials can be a nightmare though so I hope they sort this out -- my mother's Audi makes you type with analog controls and it makes me want to pull my hair out. Good luck setting a destination when you're in a hurry.

IOT_Apprentice 7y ago

Mazda and other automakers build TRULY AWFUL UIs in their cars. Carplay is a godsend in this case. You can direct Siri to send texts, read texts and you have a superior GPS application. CHeck out the abomination that it Mercedes-Benz carousel for showing/selecting radio stations on their cars. What you are really advocating is tactile feedback for digital displays--with some method of shaped feedback on by the screen itself. As a touch screen's in cars don't offer haptic feedback, that is an issue. That said some aspects like moving up and down stations or songs in a playlist can be controlled by steering wheel paddles or buttons on the wheel.

gnopgnip 7y ago
The 2019 mazda 3 without the touchscreen still has carplay and android auto. You can still do all of that. You control it with the "commmander switch" instead of a touch screen, and more often with the volume knob or buttons on the wheel for the most common tasks.

madrox 7y ago

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I have no problem with touch screens in cars. My problem with is with the horrible UI those touch screens provide. They're slow to respond and don't seem well reasoned for the functions it has. It's why I love Carplay. It expands the function of the car in a needed way. Maybe analog controls are better, but interface matters less to me than function.

ChuckMcM 7y ago

I too am glad Mazda did this, now I have to decide if I want to trade in my 2018 Mazda 3 for a 2019 one :-). Touch screens are cheap, mechanical switches are expensive. Mechanicals are expensive from an acquisition cost, tooling/manufacturing cost, maintenance cost, and replacement cost. So automakers were happy to move everything into the touch screen and reduce these costs and boost their margin. I hope Mazda will be able to hold this line with their accountants.

ec109685 7y ago
How much do mechanical switches cost?
- ChuckMcM 7y ago
  Depends, are they custom or off the shelf? Are they environmentally sealed or open? How many cycles do they need to last for? What sort of conditioning circuitry do they need? There will always be the cost of additional wiring harness and copper wire at some cost per foot. Some additional testing time when the consoles are assembled to verify the switches are all working Etc. Time has a cost associated with it during assembly as well.

brightball 7y ago

I understand your reasoning, but for me after having used Car Play in my wife's vehicle...it was a major factor in my car shopping experience. I spend a lot more time getting things set "just right" on my phone than I ever will on my car. Being able to hop in and have Waze, Google Maps, Pandora "just work" and be easily accessible rather than some built in system within the car that's going to just "check a box"...it's night and day. Car Play was so far above anything I've seen in a vehicle before that I actually miss it when it's not there. I can understand the preference for analog controls though. It will be interesting to see how it pans out.

rconti 7y ago

Have you ever used iDrive? I've been using it in cars occasionally for at least 10 years and it still confuses me. I just bought my first vehicle with it yesterday, so maybe I'll get better at it. Touchscreens are not great in cars but if you can perform the action quickly, it beats fiddling with a knob for 15 seconds.

tcfunk 7y ago
Does it? I can locate and adjust a knob without ever taking my eyes off the road. The same can't be said for a touchscreen.
- rconti 7y ago
  You didn't answer the iDrive question. I can find and fiddle with the knob/control, but I still need to look at the screen to figure out what actually happened. It's not like a simple volume knob which I can do without looking. IOW a well-designed touchscreen UI can be better than a poorly designed non-touchscreen UI. And, unfortunately, most car infotainment systems are poorly-designed.

TomVDB 7y ago

> This to me is insane reasoning. That is no way user centric. This decision is 100% business driven and has nothing to do with the end user. I absolutely hate user interface of my Audio (with rotary knob and without touch screen), so I use CarPlay pretty much exclusively. I would love to be able to use a touch screen on that for some of the interactions. > It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. You can't expect that all car markers will develop a good branded interface, just like most Android phone makers have a UI that's worse than the standard Android one. With CarPlay, I get to use a UI from a company that's an expert a making good apps.

scotu 7y ago

It makes prefect sense: the whole automotive industry has a terrible track record for ui/ux in the non-driving parts of the cars because they don't care about it enough to put the effort in. So they outsource to Apple and Google that made a, frankly, even with touchscreens, better system then what car manifacturers would have ever produced. Now the problem is that Apple and Google had a hammer and treated the problem like it was a nail when it was not...

luisaguimaraes 7y ago

Exactly! there's no place for a touchscreen in the car, although many drivers don't know it:/

pbreit 7y ago

Hopefully you were able to grasp the need for touch screens on mobile devices. Same for cars.

rhizome 7y ago

Hah. My car is a 2008, older than most in-car technologies, but when I've thought about replacing it, a big click-knob was going to be a #1 requirement. It just seemed like a mousewheel for car: an instant classic.

m463 7y ago

I will say that navigation to an address is much much better with an on-screen keyboard. It is a uniformly HORRIBLE experience with buttons and knobs. Maybe the endgame should be voice, but that can be hit or miss too.

petre 7y ago

Mazda's touch screen is far away up on the dashboard while other brands like Citroen or Tesla place it between the driver and passenger, so it's easily operated by both. I like both Audi's rotary controller and touch screens. Both are a distraction to the driver because you have to navigate menus, not particulary because of the interface. Seat also has a touchscreen and it's a VW brand.

didibus 7y ago

I'm not buying a car with no touch screen. I like to have physical buttons for AC, and quick switching between media, radio, a dial for volume, things like that. But I also need a touch screen for Google Maps, and my music apps. Often times, my passenger might navigate these. Edit: Also, in all fairness, where the screen is relative to the dash matters, and the size of it as well. From the photos on the post, those Mazda touch screens looked pretty small and awkwardly positioned for touch controls.

GVIrish 7y ago

> Audi, for instance has said that part of the reason it’s discontinuing its rotary controller is that a touchscreen better supports Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. The baffling thing about that is that Audi's MMI system was actually pretty darned good. And a few of the cars support controlling Apple Carplay with the rotary dial. Audi and BMW used to sell their dial interfaces as a unique advantage over touchscreen only infotainment systems. It blows my mind that they're (Audi at least) going in the opposite direction now.

breakyerself 7y ago

I like my touch screen. There is a lot I can do on it without much distraction. If something is in a sub menu that takes more than a fraction of a second to get to then I wait until I'm on a straight away that autopilot can handle and do it while I'm on autopilot.

jsight 7y ago

> This to me is insane reasoning. That is no way user centric. This decision is 100% business driven and has nothing to do with the end user. It basically means they have given up on developing a good branded interface between the driver and the car. This is really wrong. People were begging Mazda to add Android Auto and Apple CarPlay for years and they have only just recently added them. Adding these features has everything to do with what people want. Android Auto is pretty amazing, and is steadily getting better as well.

jrochkind1 7y ago

> Many studies I conducted actually told me that people favored analog controls over digital touch screens controls. It gives you tactile feedback, making it accessible for anyone with sense of touch. I assumed this was widely known (because of COURSE we do), but the digital touch screens were CHEAPER than dedicated physical controls for all desired functions. To design as well as to mass produce.

zerd 7y ago

Same reason I hate the MacBook TouchBar. It distracts, requires looking at it, does not give good feedback and is context dependent (buttons move around).

tracker1 7y ago

I've hated touch screens in cars... I generally rely on bluetooth, only because the controls are so bad, at least with BT I can pick up my phone and bring it into view if needed, but the steering controls handle next navigation, which along with volume are about 95% of interactivity. The other 5% being maps. If the Mazda navigation/interaction/entertainment experience is better, I'm definitely in favor. I miss the in-between period, where I could just insert a USB drive with sorted directories of mp3s and use that easily.

smsm42 7y ago

> This to me is insane reasoning. Not insane but highly cynical. They are increasing risk to my - their user's - life in order to save some bucks on R&D and integration investment. Does it make you wonder where else did the make the same tradeoff? It should. > I hope other brands start following Mazda again for this choice. Same here. When I buy my next car, I would ensure it doesn't have controls that require me to be distracted from driving to operate even the most basic functions.