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

391–400 of 671 posts

Re: Please make a dumb car

#391

Post by drdaeman »

breakpointalpha wrote: post #193

Bought a Mazda CX5 a few months ago. Thank god Mazda currently has the "driver first" mentality. NO Touchscreen! Main input is through a comfortable knob in front of the arm rest, where your hand naturally lands when resting. Gauge cluster is digital, but analog type dials for spedo, etc. AC, Power Cool/heated seats, driver assists, auto-park, all controlled via BUTTONS! It's a modern miracle and one of the big reaso…

> but analog type dials for spedo

Why is this considered an upside?

When I shopped for a car, I've specifically looked for one with a simple (uncluttered) large digital number-only speedometer. Ended up buying 2013 Civic, which is still bad in other regards but got this one right, with a large digital speedometer conveniently located not behind the steering wheel but right below the windshield (less eye travel; and still in peripheral vision even when looking at the road). https://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Honda...

I can read a number in a few milliseconds, ending up with an exact reading. So, I instantly know e.g. if I'm at, below, or above the speed limit (or desired/safe speed).

All those analog gauges take me - personally - at least an order of magnitude longer to mentally process. I can get a rough idea (±5 or ±10 {mph,km/h} depending on the dials) relatively quick - but still much longer than it takes for me to digest a readily spelled out number. Or I can spend an eternity (2+ seconds) to get a more precise reading.

And it's not as if acceleration rate normally matters, so unlike some other instruments, ability to watch the speedometer needle moving doesn't make much sense to me.

---

Oh, and I can't say I want a "smart" car, I just have a pet peeve about an awful (IMHO) designs of instrument clusters in most cars. It's either a bunch of round analogue gauges straight from grandpa's dream car (with special love for a huge engine rpm indicator, no matter the type of transmission - I really don't get this) or cyberpunk neon all the way with so much visual clutter and total absence of any sane color coding, and pray to manufacturer they don't decide all that stuff goes onto that giant iPad strapped somewhere next to your knee (thanks, Elon! Although, to be fair, at least it's plain, large and black on white)

Re: Please make a dumb car

#392

Post by sklargh »

leetcrew wrote: post #332
prova_modena wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There are a fair number of reviewers out there (Catchpole, Savagegeese) who are starting to savage some of this stuff. Physical buttons are a safety feature.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#393

Post by olyjohn »

protomyth wrote: post #213

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 1992 Miata came with an honest-to-god oil pressure gauge in it, that gave you real oil pressure readings. The pressure gauge moves back and forth with engine RPMs, because the oil pump is driven off of the engine. More RPM = more oil pressure. That's how cars work.

In 1994, Mazda removed it, and put in a "Dumb" gauge. It looks like a gauge, but really is either on above a certain PSI or off below that. They did this because so many people were bringing in their cars for service because they didn't understand how the real pressure gauge worked, and thought something was wrong.

There are actually lots of cars like this. My Ford Explorer has a dumb oil pressure gauge. My Honda Fit doesn't even have a coolant temp gauge. So I only know when the thing gets too hot, or if the coolant is too cold. Can't tell if the car starts running hotter than normal to catch a problem before it destroys something.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#395

Post by throwawayboise »

mavhc wrote: post #361
sho_hn wrote: 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…

The problem is hardware people can't write software, nor can they put in decent hardware so the software is fast. Nor make it secure. That's why people buy Teslas, they're a software company that makes hardware on the side. And participates in hacker challenges, offering cars to the winners. No one actually wants cars with no computers, they just think they do because they don't realise how much computers do, like re…

No, I really want a car with no computers. I want analog gauges, a real gear selector lever, and switches and knobs for other accessories. A tactile environment that doesn't demand my visual focus to use is what I want. I have no need for a computer in my car, and to the extent I do, my phone is perfectly capable.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#396

Post by twobitshifter »

throwawayboise wrote: post #376
olyjohn wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actual rear visibility would be an upgrade. Cars don't seem to come with that anymore.

Wind tunnel engineering. Cars do not have large upright rear windows anymore because a sloping "fastback" design with a higher rear deck is more aerodynamic and gets an extra fraction of an MPG on the fuel economy rating.

I’m not so sure this is entirely due to fuel. A Volkswagen Golf with great fuel economy still has a big rear window and an FJ Cruiser has a tiny one and chugs gasoline. Many of the cars don’t actually have dramatic tapering roof lines, what they have is rising belt lines which cut into the window space.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#397

Post by wolverine876 »

porknubbins wrote: post #23

Power seats are not a pointless luxury. I’m pretty sure they are continuously adjustable which is much better than trying to pull on some lever and get the seat to pop into approximately the right place. To say nothing of mulitple drivers with memorized positions etc.

> Power seats are not a pointless luxury. I’m pretty sure they are continuously adjustable which is much better than trying to pull on some lever and get the seat to pop into approximately the right place. To say nothing of mulitple drivers with memorized positions etc.

YMMV, but I have no problem using mechanical adjustments. Power is no advantage for me.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#398

Post by tbdenney »

throwaway946513 wrote: post #220

I bought a 2022 Subaru Impreza Sport Hatchback last year in September. 5 Speed Manual Transmission Heated Seats Cruise Control SXM Radio All-wheel drive No turbo to consume oil, no software to control the car. The Radio has Android Auto, and some software updates available for some nice 'radio features', like showing you the news, weather, sports information, etc. Never used it. I still own a 1999 Isuzu Rodeo, safety…

The last vehicle I owned about 15 years ago was a late 90's model Rodeo and I absolutely loved it. I hope you take yours out for a spin every now and then!

Re: Please make a dumb car

#399

Post by temporallobe »

My favorite car, ever, was a ‘96 Tercel my mother gave me (she was literally going to junk it). It was completely mechanical and analog, and I absolutely loved it. It was fun, reliable, and dead simple to maintain and operate. Only things I did to upgrade it was to install an aftermarket audio system so I could use my smartphone with it, and I installed slightly wider tires to give it a bit more stability. It reliably got 36-40 mpg on regular gas, and since everything was mechanical (even down to the rack-and-pinion steering), nothing ever broke, ever. That thing had about 400,000 miles on the odo before I sold it. Good times.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#400

Post by bonestamp2 »

sho_hn wrote: post #292
dntrkv wrote: 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 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…

The big difference between cars and smartphones is that you can focus all of your attention on your smartphone screen to use it. That's not true for the driver of an automobile.

The best automobile interfaces use knobs of different sizes and with different textures so that you can find them without looking. Buttons should be arranged in rows, so they are easy to find with a short look. Extremely common buttons should be located on the steering wheel. Etc.

Until screens can offer some kind of dynamic tactile experience, where you can feel what you're about to control, they can't be better than real tactile buttons and knobs.

Don't get me wrong, I love a big screen in my car for advanced features (360 camera, vehicle settings, navigation, music, etc). But the basics need to be tactile.

Post reply on HN