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

121–130 of 570 posts

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

#121

Post by cheschire »

ubermonkey wrote: post #116
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…

>Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are okay-ish, but frankly I find the experience of just having the phone on a mount and using that as the display to be far superior in almost every way. That's super confusing to me. How is that superior to the larger presentation of (e.g.) CarPlay that has (a) bigger touch targets and (b) an automatically filtered presentation of apps relevant to driving? I find CarPlay to be so good…

I think GP finds the tactile buttons more worthwhile than the larger screen, and the small phone screen is "good enough" for all the rest.

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

#122

Post by prepend »

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.

It’s not as good as my dumb bmw “connected drive” from 5 years ago.

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

#123

Post by vel0city »

filoleg wrote: post #37
master_crab wrote: post #15

Earlier 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…

EVs with Google's software native like the Polestar have that functionality. Google Maps can do it, its more of a limitation of the current Android Auto implementation.

I wonder if Android Auto would be able to get this data with the current structure of Android Auto, or if existing cars would never be able to support it.

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

#124

Post by twblalock »

vel0city wrote: post #108
twblalock wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What good is tactile feedback when you have no idea what you're adjusting without staring at the screen? This is what people don't understand about touchscreen vs dial-based UIs. One is not safer than the other if they both require you to take your eyes off the road and look at a screen! If car makers want to have a button control a feature, then they should simply make a button that controls that feature. Cars wor…

The idea with the touchscreen controls is that the driver shouldn't really be using the touchscreen at all while driving except as a quick reference to the map. You're not supposed to be using the screen to adjust your media while driving, there's steering wheel and voice controls. You're not supposed to be adjusting the climate controls while moving, auto climate should just handle it. Why would I want to be distrac…

I doubt that was actually the intention, and even if it was, we all know that's not how people actually use their cars.

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

#125

Post by syzar »

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…

I recently got a Mazda CX-5. Previous car was a Ford Escape. I much prefer Mazda’s approach. The touchscreen on the Ford was a pain to use after several years. I think the screen’s touch sensitivity degrades over time. I don’t know. It was especially bad in winter. I haven’t owned the Mazda long enough to know if the joystick will degrade much over time but I find the interface easy to use and navigate. It does sometimes take a while to acknowledge a click. That’s annoying but overall I really like Mazda’s approach.

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

#126

Post by Swizec »

twblalock wrote: post #86
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…

> What good is tactile feedback when you have no idea what you're adjusting without staring at the screen? This is what people don't understand about touchscreen vs dial-based UIs. One is not safer than the other if they both require you to take your eyes off the road and look at a screen! If car makers want to have a button control a feature, then they should simply make a button that controls that feature. Cars wor…

> Buttons, dials, or trackpads that move a cursor or select items on a screen are slower than touch-based UIs, require at least as much driver attention, and are less ergonomic than just putting your finger on the exact item you want

Mercedes does this really well. I was surprised.

You can use the screen as a touchscreen, or there's a dial thingy on the armrest that lets you scroll around the UI by flicking your fingers. Similar to keyboard navigation on computers.

The end result is a touchscreen you can use effectively when stationary and an easy-to-use control for when you're moving and need to deal with your arm moving relative to the car. And the sequence of UI selections are intuitive enough that after 20min you can do it almost without looking.

My understanding is they've been working on this combo for 10+ years. Newer models (since ~2018) have a full on touchpad instead of the wheel.

https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-news/tech/mercedes-mbux-in...

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

#127

Post by rootusrootus »

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #66
bayindirh wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then, I invite you to drive a Renault Taliant which has no screen and delegates everything to your phone. Plug it in and fix your phone to the supplied mount, open nav. Your phone is a throttling, OLED dimming, overheating fireball from all the processing it has to do with the summer sun beaming onto it, broiling and killing it in the process. I don't recommend this. The car has a terrific iPod interface built into i…

That model probably wouldn't be legal in the US where all new vehicles are required to have a video screen for a rearview camera. Since they're already required to have the screen for that purpose, it ends up being used to eliminate other controls.

It doesn't have to be a touchscreen, nor part of the infotainment. The inexpensive compliant solution is a rearview mirror with embedded 2 or 3 inch LCD.

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

#128

Post by vel0city »

twblalock wrote: post #124
vel0city wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea with the touchscreen controls is that the driver shouldn't really be using the touchscreen at all while driving except as a quick reference to the map. You're not supposed to be using the screen to adjust your media while driving, there's steering wheel and voice controls. You're not supposed to be adjusting the climate controls while moving, auto climate should just handle it. Why would I want to be distrac…

I doubt that was actually the intention, and even if it was, we all know that's not how people actually use their cars.

Yeah, they drive while holding their phones on speakerphone while talking into it like they're about to take a bite out of a sandwich.

Other than volume and next track/station, just about any other media control is going to have my hand off the wheel for a bit and probably require me to look at what its doing even if its all just a bunch of buttons and knobs. Like what, change which folder I'm in? Change to a different playlist? Choose a different app entirely? None of that is going to be done by just feeling around the dashboard.

And as mentioned, I'd probably return any car that I have to adjust the climate more than once a quarter. Every car I've owned for over 20 years has been able to keep its climate consistent and comfortable without the need for me to make adjustments for months on end. Why would I want to be distracted making minute adjustments to the climate settings while I drive? Why would I want to have to change the mode or turn it to more heat or more cool or turn the AC compressor on or off while I drive? Shouldn't it just be able to figure out if the car is cold turn up the heat and if the car is hot turn on the AC compressor? Wouldn't it know the optimal way to cool itself? Shouldn't it be able to figure out the best fan speed to keep the climate as programmed ahead of time?

Honestly, why should I even have to tell my car to turn on the heated seats? I don't need to on one of my cars, it turns it on automatically when its cold outside.

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

#129

Post by bottlepalm »

kkfx wrote: post #38

Cars OEMs know (in general, more or less) how to build cars. In electronics tend to be crappy at best in IT terms they are like classic dumb users, except they actually design crapware. It's not much Ford, it's ANY OEMs I know of...

(except Tesla who actually has their own hardware, software, dev team and frequently pushes updates for years)

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

#130

Post by syzar »

vel0city wrote: post #110
izacus wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I own a Mazda and using Android Auto with physical controls works just fine, no idea what the OP is talking about. All the main driving features are accessible by buttons and don't need eyes off the road. It's a massive difference in compasion to some brands that require you to use touchscreen to switch to next track or adjust AC temp.

Which cars have touchscreens and don't have steering wheel media controls?

Volvo and Ford Edge use touchscreens to adjust AC and there is no steering wheel control for it.
Post reply on HN