Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Please make a dumb car

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 671 posts

Re: Please make a dumb car

#181

Post by ralphhughes »

robin_reala wrote: post #31

The original VW Up dispensed with a screen beyond a small radio display, and just came with a mount for the smartphone you were bound to have with you. Cabin shot: https://cdn1.buyacar.co.uk/sites/buyacar/files/styles/galler...

That is a genuinely nice user interface. I can see what virtually everything is from a distance in the picture.

I especially like the larger fuel gauge; I drove a car once that had a handful of little LCD rectangles like a coarse bar graph. I struggled to tell if I had 50% or 75% left!

Re: Please make a dumb car

#182

Post by matty22 »

junon wrote: post #5

Same with TVs, please. I can't find a single OLED on the market that doesn't have Android or some shitty Samsung OS installed on it.

Check out Spectre. Decent enough screens, come in lots of sizes, all entirely dumb panels. Love mine and wouldn't trade it for any 'smart' TV.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#183

Post by q1w2 »

noduerme wrote: post #84

Strongly agree with this article. The car I love is my 1980 Datsun, but it just isn't good in the rain. My daily car is a Fiat 124 Spider. Reason I bought it was it was the least complicated, most direct driver-to-pavement, latest, fastest ride I could get for $20k with a stick shift. I won't buy an automatic. To Fiat's credit, I think they're the last manufacturer selling cars in America whose standard price is for…

Similarly, I'm making sure I get ever mile out of my 1993 Jeep Wrangler. It's rusting in places, but I absolutely love that I can service the car myself. It has never broken down in almost 30 years!

Re: Please make a dumb car

#184

Post by chakintosh »

lacogubik wrote: post #169
mwint wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m having a hard time understanding how “I forgot to change gears and then hit the gas” can be classed a UX problem. Sounds like PEBKAC.

I think what they are implying is that car with so many safety features should be able to handle this situation. Volvo has lot of "collision avoidance" safety features, so one would expect that they could handle this as well. This is common feature in other cars - I rented mazda few years back and it did automatically stop when I almost reversed into another car.

That's actually what I meant. It's unfortunate because the car already has everything it needs to handle this situation. I admit it was an idiotic thing from my part to do, but still, you gotta expect better from a 56K car whose main selling point is safety.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#185

Post by Fatnino »

salawat wrote: post #174
lacogubik wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what they are implying is that car with so many safety features should be able to handle this situation. Volvo has lot of "collision avoidance" safety features, so one would expect that they could handle this as well. This is common feature in other cars - I rented mazda few years back and it did automatically stop when I almost reversed into another car.

At that point, the driver really is to blame though. Manufacturer's job is to make things affordably; not to save himanity from themselves despite the ongoing insistance by governments that somehow the industrial sector should take on the onus for technically enforcing whatever measures that some bureaucrat sets their sights on today. This mentality that the car should make up for fundamental defects in safe driving…

And yet, airbags are a thing.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#187

Post by lacogubik »

salawat wrote: post #174
lacogubik wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what they are implying is that car with so many safety features should be able to handle this situation. Volvo has lot of "collision avoidance" safety features, so one would expect that they could handle this as well. This is common feature in other cars - I rented mazda few years back and it did automatically stop when I almost reversed into another car.

At that point, the driver really is to blame though. Manufacturer's job is to make things affordably; not to save himanity from themselves despite the ongoing insistance by governments that somehow the industrial sector should take on the onus for technically enforcing whatever measures that some bureaucrat sets their sights on today. This mentality that the car should make up for fundamental defects in safe driving…

> the driver really is to blame though

Yes, I know I'm responsible. I do not want/need car/manufacturer to be responsible, I just want technology to help where it could.

> Manufacturer's job is to make things affordably

This maybe is your opinion, but that's not how it works. There is plenty of manufacturer's who manufacture things which are not affordable and plenty of people buy it. Pretty much any industry has luxury segment which also tends to be most profitable

> This mentality that the car should make up for fundamental defects in safe driving is horrifying

Humans are imperfect. Stress, distractions, tiredness etc could make anyone to make mistake, even yourself. Why would adding safety features be horrifying?

Re: Please make a dumb car

#188

Post by Fatnino »

random_savv wrote: post #67

> For media, an aux input does it all. Doubles as a charging cable, and you could easily swap it out for different and new devices I thought aux only carries analog sound, is charging a new feature? Did I miss Aux-C? What does the author mean?

He means a typical usb data connection.

Friend of mine called me from his rental car asking why his phone notifications were still coming through the car despite having Bluetooth turned off.

Of course he was charging his phone from the built in USB port and it was actually a data port.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#189

Post by inimino »

Eji1700 wrote: post #95
function_seven wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your second video horrified me. What the hell are they thinking with the touch-sensitive inputs on the steering wheel? Nevermind the weird shape and the issues with orientation when signaling during a steering maneuver. Those aren't actual buttons, they're no better than a touch screen. When I drive, my hands aren't always in the exact same position on the wheel. Muscle-memory won't reliably have my thumb landing on…

Glad i'm not the only one who thinks this is insane. I could maybe see a yolk, but dear god get me AWAY from touch screen style buttons in any serious process, let alone ones that can wind up in different orientations. And why in the hell does a yolk need to have the horn on a button rather than the center of the yolk as anyone would expect? Maybe there's some technical reason i'm unaware of, but this seems actively…

> yoke

Used to turn the plane.

Also put on oxen to pull a plow.

> yolk

Yellow part of an egg.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#190

Post by gnicholas »

khazhoux wrote: post #74

Our Volvo doesn't let you adjust the volume when you're in reverse. That means if you're backing out of the garage and the music is blaring -- you can't turn it off! The Volvo UI pops up an almost full-display warning when it can't connect to the phone over bluetooth on startup. This UI takes priority over the rear camera . So I guess it's better to hit Timmy and his puppy when I'm backing out, so long as I know my p…

Weird! My older (2007) Volvo doesn't let me change the station in reverse, but I can adjust the volume via a knob, or turn off the radio by pushing the knob/button.

Hopefully the system on your Volvo can be updated to fix what are presumably bugs in the system!

Post reply on HN