4 ms·

I don’t mind a touch screen for GPS/CarPlay. But control of the vehicles operation, environment and entertainment systems should have robust, tactile and intui

by jcims 5y ago

I don’t mind a touch screen for GPS/CarPlay. But control of the vehicles operation, environment and entertainment systems should have robust, tactile and intuitive physical input devices that don’t require eyeballs to use. Not to get too far on a tangent but one of the best ways to increase intuition of a control is to provide haptic feedback. This guy has a few projects related to that, this video summarizes them pretty nicely. https://youtu.be/9Eh1p_rUQMA https://youtu.be/9Eh1p_rUQMA

romwell 5y ago
In the world of unicorns and ponies, sure. In the real world, once you put a screen anywhere, that's where the entire UX will go. The temptation to do so it's seemingly irresistible.
- jcims 5y ago
  Oh yeah I totally agree. You're going to need a brand manager with brass balls and knuckles to match to maintain that separation.
- FDSGSG 5y ago
  You can look at literally any non-electric BMW to disprove this. Everything important has physical controls. BMW doesn't exist in some world of unicorns, it's a very real carmaker.
  - rjzzleep 5y ago
    I rented a car in Germany ones but unfortunately I dont remember if it was a BMW or Mercedes. It had a fancy but horrendous touch nob and I just couldn't figure out how to move the car. Car makers consider everything touch a premium feature. The more touch the better/expensive. But to be fair I'm also extremely turned off by how Tesla "reimagined" the door knob.
    - FDSGSG 5y ago
      BMWs have a touch nob clickwheel thing, there is no part of the UX that requires or even strongly encourages you to use the touch functionality.
      - rjzzleep 5y ago
        I think we might be talking about different things. It was a touch knob where the gear shift would be. Everything in that car was off in my opinion.
  - TacticalCoder 5y ago
    Porsche too: up until a few years ago they had a very strict policy of "one physical button / one function". Now lately they stuffed a bit too much gimmicks in their cars so they couldn't put everything behind buttons and they picked some kind of a happy middle ground: they've got a panel which physically moves and gives a great feedback (I think they're using quality microswitches underneathh the panel), but the icons showing on the panel can vary. They also have a touchscreen for the gimmicks, but everything important has physical controls.
  - romwell 5y ago
    >Everything important has physical controls. Right, and who decides what's important? And how many physical controls still require you to look at the screen to use? I looked at that dial/joystick thingie, and was non-plussed.
    - FDSGSG 5y ago
      As far as I can tell everything that you would have operated with a button in a 90s car is still operated with a button without any need to look at the screens. They've simply added stuff on top of the existing controls. AC, radio, massaging seats, windows and lights can all be operated without looking at screens. Sure, the navigation requires you to look at the screen (duh?). You don't have to use the navigation. >I looked at that dial/joystick thingie, and was non-plussed. You never need to touch this while driving. The UX does not encourage you to do so. Unless you use the built in navigation, you'll only be touching the dial to do things like pair phones and navigate settings menus.
misnome 5y ago
> But control of the vehicles operation, environment and entertainment systems should have robust, tactile and intuitive physical input devices that don’t require eyeballs to use. Last time we looked at cars we avoided anything like this, it was depressingly common. Worst, I think, was Peugeot - the volume and (I think) AC were completely controlled by the touch screen - but you couldn't just press and hold, when you pressed it, it only moved one "setting" and you needed to tap-tap-tap to change more than one notch. Also, the above-steering HUD screen had frame-rate issues! It's completely absurd that they both sell this and people buy it. We did end up going for a brand which had touch for radio channels/Carplay, but physical buttons for controlling AC, volume, start/stop/skip controls etc. I really, really hope this trend goes away.
TacticalCoder 5y ago
> I don’t mind a touch screen for GPS Yup, it's basically the only time when I use the touchscreen in mine: I start the car, enter the GPS coordinates/address and then I control everything from my steering wheel, using buttons with real feedback and without needing to take neither my hands off the steering wheel nor my eyes off the road. My car also happens to have a gimmick: "voice control / voice command" but it's only good when you're alone in the car. As long as there are people talking, it sucks. It also interrupts the music and I hate that. I do use it once in a while but I'm not a big fan. Touchscreen sucks and those who don't even have haptic feedback: I don't even have words for that. If I recall correctly there as least one major japanese car manufacturer who decided to get rid of touchscreens a few years ago. Good ridance, it's a poor system.
- dv_dt 5y ago
  The car ui’s to get to car play usually make me want to poke my eyes out. Car maker supplied GPS is terrible too. Just give me car play and Siri or the android equivalent.
  - dafoex 5y ago
    I generally like car UIs (I'm a fan of glossy things rather than flat things) but no amount of polish will make the layout not suck. Its usually designed for left hand drive cars and clusters common actions near the wheel, but won't change when you're in a right hand drive, causing you to lean across the centre console to use it. Android auto (and I'm hoping Apple's equivalent) mostly handles this amazingly, putting common functions actually close to you. Its not all good, though. The Skoda Karoq has this split personality thing going on where it comes with its own sat nav, and that tries to take over your experience when you start navigating in Google maps. Its only a (first world) problem when you have the overly fancy glass cockpit, but it likes to replace your speedometer with a full screen map from the internal sat nav, which has none of the information from Google such as your next turn or the blue line showing your route.
    - FDSGSG 5y ago

by jcims 5y ago

romwell 5y ago

In the world of unicorns and ponies, sure. In the real world, once you put a screen anywhere, that's where the entire UX will go. The temptation to do so it's seemingly irresistible.

jcims 5y ago
Oh yeah I totally agree. You're going to need a brand manager with brass balls and knuckles to match to maintain that separation.
FDSGSG 5y ago
You can look at literally any non-electric BMW to disprove this. Everything important has physical controls. BMW doesn't exist in some world of unicorns, it's a very real carmaker.
- rjzzleep 5y ago
  I rented a car in Germany ones but unfortunately I dont remember if it was a BMW or Mercedes. It had a fancy but horrendous touch nob and I just couldn't figure out how to move the car. Car makers consider everything touch a premium feature. The more touch the better/expensive. But to be fair I'm also extremely turned off by how Tesla "reimagined" the door knob.
  - FDSGSG 5y ago
    BMWs have a touch nob clickwheel thing, there is no part of the UX that requires or even strongly encourages you to use the touch functionality.
    - rjzzleep 5y ago
      I think we might be talking about different things. It was a touch knob where the gear shift would be. Everything in that car was off in my opinion.
- TacticalCoder 5y ago
  Porsche too: up until a few years ago they had a very strict policy of "one physical button / one function". Now lately they stuffed a bit too much gimmicks in their cars so they couldn't put everything behind buttons and they picked some kind of a happy middle ground: they've got a panel which physically moves and gives a great feedback (I think they're using quality microswitches underneathh the panel), but the icons showing on the panel can vary. They also have a touchscreen for the gimmicks, but everything important has physical controls.
- romwell 5y ago
  >Everything important has physical controls. Right, and who decides what's important? And how many physical controls still require you to look at the screen to use? I looked at that dial/joystick thingie, and was non-plussed.
  - FDSGSG 5y ago
    As far as I can tell everything that you would have operated with a button in a 90s car is still operated with a button without any need to look at the screens. They've simply added stuff on top of the existing controls. AC, radio, massaging seats, windows and lights can all be operated without looking at screens. Sure, the navigation requires you to look at the screen (duh?). You don't have to use the navigation. >I looked at that dial/joystick thingie, and was non-plussed. You never need to touch this while driving. The UX does not encourage you to do so. Unless you use the built in navigation, you'll only be touching the dial to do things like pair phones and navigate settings menus.

misnome 5y ago

> But control of the vehicles operation, environment and entertainment systems should have robust, tactile and intuitive physical input devices that don’t require eyeballs to use. Last time we looked at cars we avoided anything like this, it was depressingly common. Worst, I think, was Peugeot - the volume and (I think) AC were completely controlled by the touch screen - but you couldn't just press and hold, when you pressed it, it only moved one "setting" and you needed to tap-tap-tap to change more than one notch. Also, the above-steering HUD screen had frame-rate issues! It's completely absurd that they both sell this and people buy it. We did end up going for a brand which had touch for radio channels/Carplay, but physical buttons for controlling AC, volume, start/stop/skip controls etc. I really, really hope this trend goes away.

TacticalCoder 5y ago

> I don’t mind a touch screen for GPS Yup, it's basically the only time when I use the touchscreen in mine: I start the car, enter the GPS coordinates/address and then I control everything from my steering wheel, using buttons with real feedback and without needing to take neither my hands off the steering wheel nor my eyes off the road. My car also happens to have a gimmick: "voice control / voice command" but it's only good when you're alone in the car. As long as there are people talking, it sucks. It also interrupts the music and I hate that. I do use it once in a while but I'm not a big fan. Touchscreen sucks and those who don't even have haptic feedback: I don't even have words for that. If I recall correctly there as least one major japanese car manufacturer who decided to get rid of touchscreens a few years ago. Good ridance, it's a poor system.

dv_dt 5y ago
The car ui’s to get to car play usually make me want to poke my eyes out. Car maker supplied GPS is terrible too. Just give me car play and Siri or the android equivalent.
- dafoex 5y ago
  I generally like car UIs (I'm a fan of glossy things rather than flat things) but no amount of polish will make the layout not suck. Its usually designed for left hand drive cars and clusters common actions near the wheel, but won't change when you're in a right hand drive, causing you to lean across the centre console to use it. Android auto (and I'm hoping Apple's equivalent) mostly handles this amazingly, putting common functions actually close to you. Its not all good, though. The Skoda Karoq has this split personality thing going on where it comes with its own sat nav, and that tries to take over your experience when you start navigating in Google maps. Its only a (first world) problem when you have the overly fancy glass cockpit, but it likes to replace your speedometer with a full screen map from the internal sat nav, which has none of the information from Google such as your next turn or the blue line showing your route.
  - FDSGSG 5y ago