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

Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 570 posts

Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer

#71

Post by bonestamp2 »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #43
bonestamp2 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Ya, that's the fault of journalists always complaining about "blank" panels. The former Porsche solution to that was better than this new panel.

Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer

#72

Post by foxyv »

tablespoon wrote: post #31

> ...the Mustang Mach-E and the Lightning have a 15.5-inch portrait center screen running Sync 4A, which is the same as Sync 4 with the addition of touchscreen climate controls and widgets that fill out the vertical height of the display. Why??? Climate controls should not be on a touchscreen. Display is fine, but control is not. Just leave space for some knobs and a mode switch.

I don't know about the F150 Lightning, but the Fords I've seen all use a HOTAS style setup where the climate, radio, etc... are all controlled by buttons on the steering wheel. The touchscreen is more for passengers.

Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer

#73

Post by pkulak »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #39
pkulak wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm firmly in the camp that it's not patriotic to stylize the American flag in any way... but I'd love it if you expanded on how this version is racist.

The "thin blue line" flag is used almost exclusively by the far-right, and more specifically by white supremacists. The flag on the Lightning isn't that flag, but it does resemble it.

Oh interesting. Just looked it up, and the thin blue line flag is black and white. Don't think I've ever seen a black and white American flag before.

Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer

#74

Post by HWR_14 »

rektide wrote: post #19
HWR_14 wrote: post #13

Earlier 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…

Why would I want third party support, a rich platform or an ecosystem? I want a radio and something that plays what my cellphone tells it. That's it.

Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer

#75

Post by HWR_14 »

rnk wrote: post #69
NotYourLawyer wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android is cheaper because it hoovers up the “owner’s” data.

That may be, but it wins because it's vastly better than all the alternatives, except tesla or a few other leading 'new car companies' like rivian.

How on earth is it "better"? Dumb cars are better. Obviously, I want the EV to have mission critical things related to it being an EV, but there's no reason for anything else to get fancy.

Tesla has the worst cockpit experience because it's a single large screen.

Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer

#76

Post by andrewla »

PaulWaldman wrote: post #50
andrewla wrote: post #14

Generally 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 h…

Wow, that sounds intensely bad!

I haven't actually driven a Mazda, I just heard that they were getting rid of touchscreens and it honestly didn't occur to me that they'd try to shoehorn full Android Auto or CarPlay into that. I just assumed that they would have a minimal interface and let your phone do the work, and then have "next track" and "previous track" buttons and a volume knob, plus climate control and stuff, and the screen would just have various car information; tire pressure and fuel efficiency and various camera systems for parking.

It might still work for me (I'm definitely going to test drive a Mazda when my current car needs replacing), but this is me; I disable CarPlay because I can't stand it; I prefer to just put my phone on a mount and use it directly; I just need the car systems as a speaker for the phone.

Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer

#77

Post by andrewla »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #57
andrewla wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that the car tries to decide which phone to have take over CarPlay. I actually have a cigarette lighter USB adapter so at least a second person can charge without confusing the poor car. I generally find CarPlay to be annoying -- it is too limiting a version of what is offered on the phone itself. Notably the last time I tried to use it, it did not have Google Play Music support (now that product is dead…

If Apple Maps does not let you navigate in north up orientation, then another navigation app should be able to. It does not seem like that would be a CarPlay specific restriction, but rather something the app makers did not implement. And there are a lot more apps that work with CarPlay nowadays. I think it just took a few years for all of them to roll out.

I use Google Maps even with non-CarPlay interaction because Apple Maps does not do north-up. At the time, Google Maps didn't do north-up in CarPlay mode. Maybe it's time I give it another try. Last I tried it, I found generally that things worked less good in CarPlay than they did on the phone itself, and decided to mostly treat the infotainment system as a nice set of speakers for my phone.

Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer

#78

Post by karamanolev »

genocidicbunny wrote: post #60
PaulWaldman wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 h…

> 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. You shouldn't need to do anything requiring the wheel while you're driving though. All the controls that you would want to have accessible while you're driving are physical (climate control, basic media/phone controls.) For everything else you…

Yet, it's not what people are doing. The UIs of cars and other objects should take into account how they're going to be used, not how they are designed to be used. It's been proven again and again that you can only marginally educate or tell people how to behave. It's better to make a system that is safe 7/10 in real world usage, instead of one designed for 9/10, but actually getting 5/10.

Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer

#79

Post by stonogo »

karamanolev wrote: post #78
genocidicbunny wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. You shouldn't need to do anything requiring the wheel while you're driving though. All the controls that you would want to have accessible while you're driving are physical (climate control, basic media/phone controls.) For everything else you…

Yet, it's not what people are doing. The UIs of cars and other objects should take into account how they're going to be used, not how they are designed to be used. It's been proven again and again that you can only marginally educate or tell people how to behave. It's better to make a system that is safe 7/10 in real world usage, instead of one designed for 9/10, but actually getting 5/10.

The solution to "stupid people won't keep their eyes on the road while driving" is not "force everyone else to take their eyes off the road as well."

Re: Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer

#80

Post by recursive »

olivermarks wrote: post #36

Right 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…

Anecdotal, but I just drove my electric Ford from Sacramento to Seattle and back without any particular planning or problems. Just used the built-in nav to find chargers.
Post reply on HN