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

The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

uxdesign.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 410 posts

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#311

Post by nkrisc »

akeck wrote: post #174
nkrisc wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The touch screens are the only thing keeping me on dino juice cars. I want to go electric, but they all have these awful touchscreens! I don’t want to navigate a menu to change the temperature or turn on a seat warmer. I’m just not buying an EV until there’s one that doesn’t rely on a giant touch screen for everything or I can’t buy an ICE vehicle anymore.

I believe Mazda has a policy of no touchscreens in their vehicles.

Funny you say that, because a 2018 Mazda3 is what I currently drive. It has a screen, a small one, and every common cabin control is still a physical button. The only exception is the radio, which is software, but can be controlled with a knob. But I just leave the radio on the same station always so it's not a problem for me.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#312

Post by tablespoon »

_jal wrote: post #290
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

' I'm buying used and IC, because I will not have a touch screen' That's not a solution - you have to look at market of brand new cars, as whateber is avaliable now will replace all the used cars.

Of course it is a solution. I end up with a car that doesn't have a touch screen.

>> That's not a solution - you have to look at market of brand new cars, as whateber is avaliable now will replace all the used cars.

> Of course it is a solution. I end up with a car that doesn't have a touch screen.

The point is that solution is only a band-aid. Cars wear out. New cars turn into used cars, which turn into "classic cars", which then turn into museum pieces. Especially with the later two steps, supply drops and maintenance becomes harder.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#313

Post by nkrisc »

foobarian wrote: post #201
nkrisc wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The touch screens are the only thing keeping me on dino juice cars. I want to go electric, but they all have these awful touchscreens! I don’t want to navigate a menu to change the temperature or turn on a seat warmer. I’m just not buying an EV until there’s one that doesn’t rely on a giant touch screen for everything or I can’t buy an ICE vehicle anymore.

Nit: oil formed way before dinosaurs from simple marine organisms.

You mean "dino juice" isn't the scientific term?

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#314

Post by yakshaving_jgt »

rob74 wrote: post #169
nkrisc wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The touch screens are the only thing keeping me on dino juice cars. I want to go electric, but they all have these awful touchscreens! I don’t want to navigate a menu to change the temperature or turn on a seat warmer. I’m just not buying an EV until there’s one that doesn’t rely on a giant touch screen for everything or I can’t buy an ICE vehicle anymore.

I think that's true only as long as the only electric cars you have driven are Teslas. The BMW i3 has pretty much resisted this tendency. Ok, it's already a pretty old design at this point and getting phased out, but it has lots of physical buttons (even for the seat warmer!). And I don't think electric cars that are variants of existing petrol cars (which are more and more common) will eliminate the physical control…

> If you buy an electric car from a car company, you get physical controls...

Not sure I agree with that. Even Porsche are doing touch screens, unfortunately.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#315

Post by CogitoCogito »

arky527 wrote: post #5

Modern cars seem to be moving towards all controls on a touch screen somewhere. I suppose this allows for more frequent updates, but in my experience it just leads to more bugs and more painful factory updates. Not to mention using a touchscreen to adjust the temperature while driving is incredibly dangerous compared to a dial you can feel for without taking your eyes off the road.

I wonder if there's a list somewhere of "dumb things you need to check when looking into a new car"? Most of these issues are things that are hard to notice ahead of time or during a test drive so it's kind of extra worrying to me.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#316

Post by CogitoCogito »

m463 wrote: post #296
izacus wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I suppose this allows for more frequent updates, but in my experience it just leads to more bugs and more painful factory updates. What is allows for is: cost cutting. Not having to install a mask, a button, wire harness and QA everything is a massive manufacturing cost saving. It speeds up production and lowers the amount of components that need to be sourced, installed and later made available for replacement as…

I always hope these kinds of situations would lead to a market opportunity for someone to come in and do it right... but it rarely does.

I think what really is needed is for these displays and interfaces to be replaceable like old car stereo decks.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#317

Post by rstupek »

d3sandoval wrote: post #173
arky527 wrote: post #5

Modern cars seem to be moving towards all controls on a touch screen somewhere. I suppose this allows for more frequent updates, but in my experience it just leads to more bugs and more painful factory updates. Not to mention using a touchscreen to adjust the temperature while driving is incredibly dangerous compared to a dial you can feel for without taking your eyes off the road.

We have a PHEV from Chevy (the Volt) and it has the best dashboard ever. Knobs for the stuff you want (A/C, Volume, Skip, etc.) And touchscreen for the stuff you don't (GPS, Apple/Android Auto, etc.)

Teslas have the same knobs and buttons (A/C, volume, skip, pause resume) on the steering wheel

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#318

Post by _jal »

tablespoon wrote: post #312
_jal wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it is a solution. I end up with a car that doesn't have a touch screen.

>> That's not a solution - you have to look at market of brand new cars, as whateber is avaliable now will replace all the used cars. > Of course it is a solution. I end up with a car that doesn't have a touch screen. The point is that solution is only a band-aid. Cars wear out. New cars turn into used cars, which turn into "classic cars", which then turn into museum pieces. Especially with the later two steps, suppl…

And my point is, humans wear out. They stop driving cars and eventually die.

There is a reasonable chance I won't buy another vehicle, so I don't care what the rest of the market does.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#319

Post by nicbou »

artificialLimbs wrote: post #280
nicbou wrote: post #141

The most important lesson I learned in engineering school: define the problem then look for a solution. Most people have a solution in mind before they even look at the problem, and that solution is usually "build an app", or "slap a screen on it". With bureaucracy, it's "put the form on the internet". There are a few low tech devices I much prefer: - A kitchen timer vs. my phone. I don't need to unlock the phone and…

> "A kitchen timer vs. my phone" Having to LOOK at the number? ;) I can talk to the phone while I'm slicing: 'Hey Siri, set a timer for x {timeunit}" > "Wired audio." Hoping this one doesn't keep disappearing...

It's still nice to see the time left if you're cooking things.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#320

Post by wgx »

arky527 wrote: post #5

Modern cars seem to be moving towards all controls on a touch screen somewhere. I suppose this allows for more frequent updates, but in my experience it just leads to more bugs and more painful factory updates. Not to mention using a touchscreen to adjust the temperature while driving is incredibly dangerous compared to a dial you can feel for without taking your eyes off the road.

Totally agree. Despite the move to touchscreens in cars over the years - they're acually terrible for usability and safety. The lack of tactile feedback and the fact that buttons can move position and appearance from app-to-app means that they require much more cognitive load than physical buttons.

Putting a trimmed-down Android tablet into a car is cheaper for manufacturers, but it's bad for usability.

There's been some research done that finds touchscreens are more distracting than drink or drug driving:

https://www.ala.co.uk/connect/in-car-touchscreens-more-dange...

Post reply on HN