9 ms·
I like this truck exterior design. If they "grow up" and remove touch based centrist UX (Thank you, Elon - you saved a lot of money and ruin decades of car UX)
by nbzso 5y ago
I like this truck exterior design. If they "grow up" and remove touch based centrist UX (Thank you, Elon - you saved a lot of money and ruin decades of car UX) this will sell very good numbers in the EU.
Recently I moved out of the city towards rural life and this type of vehicle will give me all I need, including good cornering for fun (due to mix of air/hydraulic suspension). Definitely looking forward to purchase (may be second gen) EV truck.
For the American market they will face serious competition from Ford and other truck manufacturers who have brand recognition and solid fan base.
- oxplot 5y ago> Thank you, Elon - you saved a lot of money and ruin decades of car UX The motivation behind a single touchscreen (from the horse’s mouth) is the gradual move to full self driving. Given that all Teslas are capable of fully autonomous driving, pending software, it doesn’t make sense to pollute the car interior with controls that will become obsolete during the lifetime of the car, not even accounting for extra cost associated with manufacturing dozens/hundreds of extra parts. Now if others are copying it without understanding why it’s done that way, it’s on them.
- mdorazio 5y ago> Given that all Teslas are capable of fully autonomous driving, pending software They are not. Please stop propagating this falsehood.
- oxplot 5y agoThey are, and it's true, even TODAY, and I'm going to repeat it every chance I get, because I've learnt that it takes repetition to correct misunderstanding and ignorance! Just go on youtube and search for FSD Beta 10. Yes, it makes mistakes, and yes it has a long way before you can sleep at the wheel but it's doing door to door driving today across the entire US, like no other car even comes close to doing.
- ra7 5y agoFSD is level 2 self driving by Tesla’s own admission to CA DMV. So no, they are not even close to being “full self driving” capable.
- oxplot 5y agoThe only difference between level 2 and up is whether the system needs attention should it make a mistake, and ATM Tesla must have a fully attentive driver at all times. The problem with the SAE levels is that level 2 covers such a broad category of autonomous capabilities that it’s kind of meaningless calling a car level 2. There are cars at level two manufactured a decade ago and Tesla FSD is also level 2 and the latter may as well be a spaceship in comparison. Knowing there are 5 levels and Tesla is at level 2 does not in any way give one a notion of how autonomous the car is, only that it may make mistakes x% of the time. An analogy with a SaaS is having a full featured service that’s available 99% of time and dismissing it as every other toy service out there, only because it’s not available 99.99% of the time. That’s the situation with Tesla more or less. Granted the march towards more 9s is going to take some time. EDIT: I looked up the "Tesla admitting level 2" and it's in regards to their *current* Autopilot software that's been around for years, not FSD Beta which is currently only rolled out to a few thousand people in US. So seems like you're not understanding the difference between Autopilot and FSD Beta. I recommend again that you watch "FSD Beta 10" videos on Youtube since you evidently have not. EDIT: removed hostile comment
- ra7 5y ago> Knowing there are 5 levels and Tesla is at level 2 does not in any way give one a notion of how autonomous the car is It literally does. SAE levels [1] are very clear in terms of who is in control, human supervision/take over expectations and Operational Design Domain. It’s not at all about mistake percentage, so the SaaS analogy is irrelevant. At the end of the day, if you’re still in level 2, it means you’re not fully autonomous because you can’t take passengers from point A to point B and handle mistakes, including safely pulling over when necessary. Tesla is nowhere close to doing this. [1] https://www.sae.org/blog/sae-j3016-update https://www.sae.org/blog/sae-j3016-update
- josephcsible 5y ago> Given that all Teslas are capable of fully autonomous driving, pending software All new ones are. There's still old ones out there that didn't ship with the HW3 computer and haven't yet had it retrofitted.
- null_shift 5y agoi’m sure that’s their cover story. but in reality they aren’t anywhere close to the level of self driving needed where you could give your full attention to the touch screen.
- oxplot 5y agoSure, hence "pending software". And if you happen to follow their progress on youtube (just search FSD Beta 10), you'll see just how advanced it already is. And it's getting better at an exponential rate.
- rasz 5y ago> Given that all Teslas are capable of fully autonomous driving accidents. All Teslas are capable of fully autonomous accidents. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrWH_0YA5XM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrWH_0YA5XM 'Tesla Autopilot Hits a Deer (and I think it will happen again.)'
- oxplot 5y agoYou will never hear about all the times it's saved people's lives and avoided accidents, so until you show me that it has in fact increased accident rates, a link to a video means nothing, unless you are a journalist and your newspaper is on the verge of going under, in which case you need some juicy drama to sell ads.
- Marciplan 5y agoYou drank quite a lot of that kool-aid, huh
- oxplot 5y agoThat's what well informed looks like from the outside!
- rasz 5y agoVideo of Tesla emergency braking or avoiding hitting a pedestrian that ran in front of it would go viral instantly. Can you show me a few? maybe one?
- oxplot 5y agoSure thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VttbZAr1TBc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VttbZAr1TBc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7otagz2NS0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7otagz2NS0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qC1PoqyZc_U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qC1PoqyZc_U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbw2ZB0Lbk8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbw2ZB0Lbk8
- nbzso 5y agoThe way I see autonomous driving is trough reality, not trough fanboism or 'tech fetishism'. The current stable driving assistant systems must be secondary to real driving. They are capable of critical prevention and effective safe-nets and when done properly they reduce risk tenfold. Idea of beta-testing on the public roads by creating consumer disinformation is outrageous and must be stopped. It is beyond believe, how regulations are soft towards applications of technologies with direct effect on human lives. My area of expertise is in UI/UX and the simplest logic possible is called ergonomic prerequisite. Every system must exist as a 100% functionality before some form of control surface is introduced. Every control surface must be human oriented. In car UX, the main function is driving and everything that reduces risk of removing focus from the road is good UX, everything that creates distraction and complication is not only bad UX - it is dangerous. In car touch interfaces are exciting for people who hate driving and love their phones. This is the main selling point. It is the result of marketing driven design and enormous amount of production savings (when removing physical controls for dedicated functions) as a business motivational vector. This will not work long-term. The Idea of vehicles as a SaaS platform also will not work. This will be CX hell and people will reject it.
- oxplot 5y ago> Idea of beta-testing on the public roads by creating consumer disinformation is outrageous and must be stopped. Everyone driving the FSD Beta knows pretty well what they're doing and what the whole thing means, hence the very strict criteria the drivers must meet to have that feature enabled, so I don't know what disinformation you're talking about. Calling it outrageous, dangerous, etc doesn't make it so, and evidently, after many month of FSD Beta, there is yet an accident to be reported resulting from use of it, in a world where every Tesla accident makes it to front page of the news. Is it an accident waiting to happen? Well, every time you get into your car, you're entering the accident lottery. It's all about the likelihood of getting into an accident and so far numbers are in Tesla's favor. And how do you imagine a system whose improvements relies heavily on real world data is meant to obtain it without large scale participation? Have a hundred employees doing rounds in a test track? The way I see autonomous driving through being well informed, and not speaking based on outdated intuitions, Tesla's pushing the envelope just enough to make meaningful progress toward full self-driving while not overly putting people at risk. > It is beyond believe, how regulations are soft towards applications of technologies with direct effect on human lives. Heavily regulating something that's in its infancy is the surest way to kill it. Those people who are constantly bitching about why robo-taxis aren't here yet even with lax regulations, can be certain to dream of it for the rest of their lives should walls be put up too early. > In car touch interfaces are exciting for people who hate driving and love their phones. Not only. I drive a M3 and I love driving it. I don't use my phone and nor find the urge to. I enjoy the lack of clutter, and the beautiful large screen when I need to use it. Every other car I sit in, feels like a 60s Russian rocket and stresses me out. Even Tesla's own Model S and Model X feels too cluttered now with the extra driver's dash screen. > This will not work long-term. The Idea of vehicles as a SaaS platform also will not work. This will be CX hell and people will reject it. Ye, that's what they said about SaaS on the Internet. Who would, in their right minds, give up control of their service and store their data and code at the mercy of a third party. Saw how that turned out.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- practice9 5y ago> decades of car UX Truth to be told, it was stagnant for last 10 years: - adding more buttons increases user's fatigue and decreases feature discoverability. With cars getting more integrated into various software features, there is no going back from touch. - no voice interaction UX or a very bad one Perhaps several programmable buttons for advanced users would be nice. But that depends on whether user really needs those custom routines and actions.
- akavel 5y ago> it was stagnant for last 10 years Could it be because it was really good?
- nbzso 5y agoExactly. The product design marketing mantra of “move fast and break things” is a plague putting all proven knowledge behind in the name of innovation for the sake of innovation (or more in the lines of VC scam, dark patterns UX and customer exploitation ). Professional design thinking is data based and when data is proving use case stability outcomes, you improve with iterative steps and optimisation. Today UX/UI Design is treated as decoration and the main audiences are corporations or software developers. You can check MBUX as an example of clutter, complexity and bad taste visuals. Just another outsourced design job in the name of corporate profit over product design.
- kwhitefoot 5y agoNo, car UIs were and are mostly horrible.