3 ms·
This seems like an extreme position that at best wastes everybody's time and doesn't improve anything (and is a good example of why being careful with regulatio
by OmarShehata 3y ago
This seems like an extreme position that at best wastes everybody's time and doesn't improve anything (and is a good example of why being careful with regulation like this is very important).
Consider settings like: how long it takes for the car to shut off the lights automatically after you turn it off and lock it. Or other obscure things. You're not going to have physical buttons for that. You'd have a digital screen with next/previous/ok buttons. That isn't any better than using a touch screen to access those settings. Arguably worse UX.
Another posted suggested allow touch screens but have them not operate while car is in motion, with no override, and I think that's a much more targeted/palatable proposal with (maybe?) less unexpected consequences.
- intrasight 3y ago> seems like an extreme position I assume you mean "no touchscreen controls" is extreme. I probably wasn't clear. By "controls" I meant those for "live" controls (environment, audio, etc). Touchscreen for settings totally make sense - as you said, it doesn't make sense to have physical inputs for settings like lights off delay. >have them not operate while car is in motion I'm okay with that too