Does this mean you have to have a Google account to drive a Ford vehicle? That's no good.
Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
41–50 of 570 posts
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is Ford switching away from a RTOS with a great history in the automotive space to try to force me to have something to do with Google?
Because there's a vibrant ecosystem around Android with wonderful third party support, with a rich platform & ecosystem already well known & loved by many developers & consumers alike. Where-as QNX is a toolkit for building one-off custom appliances that no third party will ever see or improve or enrich. One is a dead end stuck in a niche, the other realized it had to create more value than it captured. And generally…
Android is cheaper because it hoovers up the “owner’s” data.
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#43It's incredibly frustrating to me that buying a vehicle with a pushbutton, working, reliable interface is becoming increasingly impossible to do. Why is UX so horrifically bad in the vehicle space? Is it poor management decisions or a shortage of good UX engineers? I get that lumping everything into the touchscreen can be a cheaper option to build, but I'd GLADLY pay for a different option. I don't understand it.
A lot of automakers are chasing Tesla's one screen design -- they're so envious of the cost savings there. Except the Germans, they're still putting in lots of buttons and knobs -- my next car will likely be German because they seem to understand what people actually want.
Buy it quick. Even the Macan has a stupid piano-black console touch panel in its current generation.
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
“If you want to plot out a route with accurate range estimates and an effective charging strategy, you have to use the built-in nav” I saw that phrase in the story and came here to comment and saw this thread. I think we should be honest with ourselves about recent history: Apple and Google will be quicker to roll out functionality for EV specific navigation (i.e. chargers) in their apps then car manufacturers will b…
> I think we should be honest with ourselves about recent history: Apple and Google will be quicker to roll out functionality for EV specific navigation (i.e. chargers) in their apps then car manufacturers will be to fix their UI problems. I think you are missing the point of what the actual problem here is. Apple and Google already show EV charging stations on their maps just fine, you can even filter by type of cha…
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#45It's incredibly frustrating to me that buying a vehicle with a pushbutton, working, reliable interface is becoming increasingly impossible to do. Why is UX so horrifically bad in the vehicle space? Is it poor management decisions or a shortage of good UX engineers? I get that lumping everything into the touchscreen can be a cheaper option to build, but I'd GLADLY pay for a different option. I don't understand it.
The entire auto industry is driven by hype and trends rather than functionality
Yes. Just look at the appalling forward blind spot on a lot of trucks and SUVs. Or the way cars have become taller at the expense of aerodynamics.
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#46Generally speaking the horrifying quality of Ford's electronics have been enough to keep me away from even considering purchasing one. Absolutely nothing works right and certainly nothing works well. It may or may not be able to connect bluetooth, it may or may not acknowledge a USB device, it may or may not start blaring whatever FM station was last tuned in for no reason on startup, or start playing the first album…
I used to own a Ford Fusion with an early version of Sync. The car itself was great. The Sync software by Microsoft, however, was not.
One of the innumerable bugs was in the voice recognition system. No matter what song I requested, about half the time it played "Tiny Dancer" by Elton John.
I was demonstrating this bug to a friend who asked "What happens when you request Tiny Dancer?" Sure enough, it played something else.
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#47Do fleet versions of new cars/trucks also have stupid touchscreens in them?
Like a new F-450, is it driven by a shitty android tablet too?
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#48As a cyclist, I'm super excited about one day being run over by one of these things. The giant vehicle trend is getting a lot of people killed.
And why does any vehicle need to accelerate that quickly? It's irresponsible on public roads. I would really love to see acceleration and speed limiters on vehicles.
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#49Right now automotive UI's and sw are in the equivalent of pre iphone era mobile phone jankyness, just good at one or two things with a ton of cruft that doesn't work well. We all know BEVs are fast - even a 1960's UK electric milkfloat is amazingly speedy from standstill - but I'd say Ford are years away from their BEVs being viable and reliable, not least due to lack of charging network. The lousy towing performance…
The lousy towing performance probably doesn't matter. 75% of truck owners tow one time a year or less. I've had my F-150 for 8 years 45,000 miles, and it's seen a trailer 3 times for a total of less than 400 miles. I'm close to being in the market for a new truck, and the biggest deal breaker for me with the lightning is the 5.5' box instead of the 6.5' box. Weighing over 6,000 lbs also means you can't register it as a passenger vehicle in NYS without capping it - meaning you can't drive on the parkways.
https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-siz...
Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer
#50Generally speaking the horrifying quality of Ford's electronics have been enough to keep me away from even considering purchasing one. Absolutely nothing works right and certainly nothing works well. It may or may not be able to connect bluetooth, it may or may not acknowledge a USB device, it may or may not start blaring whatever FM station was last tuned in for no reason on startup, or start playing the first album…
>Mazda is apparently taking the right approach here -- increasing the tactile buttons on the dash and console, and ditching touchscreens.
Huh? After using both Ford's (2022 Explorer) and Mazda's (2022 CX-7) infotainment systems recently for several weeks, I couldn't disagree more.
Android Auto and CarPlay interfaces were designed for touchscreen control. Mazda forcing the use of a wheel, like a joystick is a safety hazard. Turing the wheel unpredictably selects objects on the screen, forcing you to keep your eyes off the road while you keep turning the wheel until the item you need is selected. In Ford's system, a quick glace us all that's required.
What good is tactile feedback when you have no idea what you're adjusting without staring at the screen?