Live data from Hacker News

Please make a dumb car

techcrunch.com

331–340 of 671 posts

Re: Please make a dumb car

#331
post #310

Aren't dumb cars going to completely go away once the transition from ICE to EV is finished? I could see them being like antiques or something, but they wouldn't really be economically viable to produce anymore. And of course, the fact that dumb cars would be more expensive to produce is just a side effect of digital being cheaper than analogue after a certain about of development.

Dumb cars aren't more expensive to produce. And EVs don't have to be "tech". It's just that is what people want.

> Dumb cars aren't more expensive to produce.

Increasingly they are. Analog connections and dials, for example, are already more expensive than digital ones. It is like...if you wanted to buy a car without power steering you really couldn't.

I guess if you want a golf cart you can buy a dumb EV. I don't know how that translates into a real car, however.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#332
post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> these unwanted smart features Only within the niche HN-type tech crowd. Most people outside of this group want these features, even other techies, including myself. It's the same discussion on any thread involving smart devices. People want this stuff, that's why there have been over 200M standalone smart speakers sold. As far as why these things get bundled, that’s just how auto manufacturing works. Every unique c…

I'm going to push back on this statement, as I spend my day-to-day more immersed in the non-techy car world than in the HN tech world. I see a lot of frustration with new tech features among car reviewers and enthusiasts. You can read almost any car-related social media forums and see ire directed at stuff like complicated touchscreen-driven interfaces and flaky emergency braking systems. I also know many older folks…

the world of car reviewers and enthusiasts is also a bubble that's pretty far removed from what typical car owners care about. I care about hard buttons, analog tachs, manual transmissions, etc., but most people I know really don't. they are somewhere between complete apathy and genuine appreciation for all the new tech features. mainly they just want some form of awd crossover that makes them feel safe.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#333

https://vanderhallusa.com Here you go. I see this companies cars driving around sometimes.

Thanks! I wonder how I haven't heard of this before.

Edit: Just saw that the Brawley is off-road only. It doesn't meet DOT standards. That would probably explain why I haven't heard of it.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#334

I'm fine with a touch screen for things like rear camera and plugging in a smart phone, but I want actual volume, temperature, and fan speed knobs. I also want all of the information about the car I can get. For example, I don't want a "tire low light", I want an air pressure in each tire with an flashing indicator that its out of safe range. I don't want an "overheat", I want the temperature and big flashing when it…

My 2016 Honda CR-V has everything in your first paragraph. I think Honda and Mazda are doing a good job of balancing physical controls versus touchscreen.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#335

I went car shopping this year in the new market and found that that if you want more a "dumb" car (UX occurs primarily outside of a touchscreen, no internet, no geolocation) you lose all potential for any nice non-smart features. So no heated/powered seats, no power windows, the material of the interior is refurbished from a spirit airlines airplane, etc. I think manufacturers are hoping that certain aspects of the m…

Well-built cars are fundamentally durable, long-lasting machines.

So of course manufacturers are eager to sneak in anything to make a car seem "worn out" and in need of replacement sooner than later.

What's frustrating is there seems to be no shortage of willing buyers eating this crap up, apparently looking forward to replacing their vehicles in lockstep with their other consumer electronics.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#336
post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm always surprised how defeatist and negative the tech community's attitude towards computerized UX in cars is. Often the opinions are simplistic and dismissive instead of zooming into the details. It's similar to when onscreen keyboards in phones where "obviously never going to work" when now, most people probably wouldn't want to give up the screen real estate for a hardware keyboard, except even more one-note. I…

Then they are charging their buyers 30k to beta test, and leaving buyers with no other option, which, I don't think most people are comfortable with. I think it's easily identifiable to the HN crowd, because most readers are very familiar with this process and the discomfort it can cause. Then you add on the argument of what they are doing with the information, and if they can be trusted..

No post body was provided.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#337

Sure, people want simple, but simple is very subjective. I want simple, +Bluetooth Audio I want simple, +rear Camera I want simple, +Cruise Control I want simple, .... https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/03/23/strategy-letter-iv...

It's really not that subjective. Take the feature set of mass-market cars from 2000 - 2008 and then just ... stop. That's your baseline. There's nothing magic about the 2000s it's just happens to be the era juuuust before people started complaining about smart features in cars.

* Media controls are handled by swappble receivers that can handle anything from tapes to Bluetooth and satellite radio depending on your preference. Everything else is physical nobs and buttons.

* Cars have cruise control, hydraulic power steering, probably power windows, push to start as an aftermarket add-on, and probably remote lock/unlock.

Broke teenagers in the early 2000s were able to figure out "basic car with add-ons." It's amazing that huge corporations can't manage.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#338

I don't mind having a smart car, in fact, I like most of the "smart" features - lane centering, adaptive cruise, emergency braking, TPMS, lane change cameras, auto headlights, auto wipers, etc. But I want buttons and knobs for everything I use while driving. I probably wouldn't pay extra for built-in navigation (it generally comes with other options that I do want), but I've found it useful a few times when I was out…

> But I want buttons and knobs for everything I use while driving.

My Subaru Impreza has a physical power/volume knob but it won't do anything when you start the car and then shift to reverse (to back out of the garage). It's like it's dedicating its resources to the rear view camera and doesn't have any cycles to handle the input events on the control knob. Also it decides to turn on the radio even if you weren't using the radio when you turned off the car. So, you have to listen to the radio blasting (at whatever the volume was when I got there, which might have been different media with lower volume such as a podcast) while you back up (might be a good time to be able to hear instead) until a few seconds after you shift to D. At that point, it processes the queued up inputs from the knob and will suddenly turn down or off depending on the inputs.

I would prefer it to be a variable (logarithmic, because that's how audio perception works) resistor directly controlling the amplifier or whatever, like radios used to be.

I love adaptive cruise. I use it 90%+ of the time. But this is also one more reason that I hate cars and will probably sell it soon. But I'll still have to deal with similar issues if I rent a ZipCar or something.

It falls into a larger category I've been thinking about a lot lately about how a lot of problems with technology these days is due to the difference in how the desires of software creators and those of users diverges and creates those problems. I'm leaning towards suggesting that everyone needs to write their own software, using shared knowledge, not just use software that other people wrote for you.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#339

I don't mind having a smart car, in fact, I like most of the "smart" features - lane centering, adaptive cruise, emergency braking, TPMS, lane change cameras, auto headlights, auto wipers, etc. But I want buttons and knobs for everything I use while driving. I probably wouldn't pay extra for built-in navigation (it generally comes with other options that I do want), but I've found it useful a few times when I was out…

ACC and LKAS on our 2019 Honda is so awful I simply can't use it.

When someone crosses 3 lanes in front of me ACC will hit the brakes hard to maintain the correct distance. It's jolting and scary.

LKAS only sees about 80% of the lanes. Rather than just driving like normal which I'm experienced with I have to sit there paranoid that something will go wrong and I'll need to react to a surprise event.

I don't know if it's the idea or the just the implementation that I hate. Am considering comma.ai

Re: Please make a dumb car

#340

I went car shopping this year in the new market and found that that if you want more a "dumb" car (UX occurs primarily outside of a touchscreen, no internet, no geolocation) you lose all potential for any nice non-smart features. So no heated/powered seats, no power windows, the material of the interior is refurbished from a spirit airlines airplane, etc. I think manufacturers are hoping that certain aspects of the m…

So I wanted something like this when we were looking for a minivan I don't trust smart devices or vehicles as that's just one more thing that will break. So we found a van didn't have those things but my wife insisted on BT and a backup cam. So we negotiated with the dealer and they were able to make a deal with us to have their shop install a backup cam and Bluetooth for cost, and we love the van ever since. My poin…

You can aftermarket this with a simple replacement rear-view mirror/camera kit. Easy-peasy. Or an aftermarket car stereo/ camera kit.
Post reply on HN