3 ms·

That's great that Tesla puts those (physical) controls on the steering wheel. But, think about this comment in context. As a reminder: I was replying to someo

That's great that Tesla puts those (physical) controls on the steering wheel. But, think about this comment in context. As a reminder: I was replying to someone who was arguing that the anti-touch-screen crowd is not justified in their hatred of touch screens in cars. My position is to agree with that crowd that touch screens in cars are bad UX. With that in mind, your comment actually vindicates my position. Touch screens are dangerously stupid UX in a car. So much so that Tesla--which has an image of being futuristic, sleek, and minimal (aesthetically)--not only has the necessary-for-driving controls on the steering wheel, but also non-essentials like media controls. If touch screens weren't objectively worse than physical controls, is it too far of a stretch to think that Mr. Musk would've wanted them in the touch screen for even more sleekness and minimalism? In any case, I think we're all agreeing in this thread that touch controls for these things would be unsafe and worse than physical controls. The case now needs to be argued that touch screens are at least equally good as physical controls for those other operations in cars. But, I don't see how that line of argumentation can possibly go well after we've established that the important controls don't belong as touch buttons.

sergiosgc 3y ago
Physical knobs and buttons are great for muscle memory. How much of a muscle memory do you have for the controls setting mirror position? For setting fade/balance on the stereo? Enabling valet mode? The UI question is only valid for controls used frequently. For everything else, I think it is already settled that they are better in the screen. At the very least, for the sake of UI simplicity. I can't imagine a physical interface for enabling or disabling every driving assistance option in a Tesla. It'd become an airliner button panel.
- ragnese 3y ago
  Fair point. We don't need dedicated, physical, buttons for infrequent or unimportant things. But, to be fair, I don't think that most people who vocally hate touch screens in cars are upset that the car manufacturers are making them set their clock via touch buttons. I assume (and I could be wrong) that they're talking about things like A/C settings, radio tuning, etc. If they aren't, then at least I am. Being able to reach over with my muscle memory to change the radio to one of my presets (yeah, I'm some old-school weirdo who still listens to FM radio when I drive) is something I appreciate.

sergiosgc 3y ago

Physical knobs and buttons are great for muscle memory. How much of a muscle memory do you have for the controls setting mirror position? For setting fade/balance on the stereo? Enabling valet mode? The UI question is only valid for controls used frequently. For everything else, I think it is already settled that they are better in the screen. At the very least, for the sake of UI simplicity. I can't imagine a physical interface for enabling or disabling every driving assistance option in a Tesla. It'd become an airliner button panel.

ragnese 3y ago
Fair point. We don't need dedicated, physical, buttons for infrequent or unimportant things. But, to be fair, I don't think that most people who vocally hate touch screens in cars are upset that the car manufacturers are making them set their clock via touch buttons. I assume (and I could be wrong) that they're talking about things like A/C settings, radio tuning, etc. If they aren't, then at least I am. Being able to reach over with my muscle memory to change the radio to one of my presets (yeah, I'm some old-school weirdo who still listens to FM radio when I drive) is something I appreciate.