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

Study finds that buttons in cars are safer and quicker to use than touchscreens

futurism.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 386 posts

Re: Study finds that buttons in cars are safer and quicker to use than touchscreens

#161

Post by messe »

rafale wrote: post #127
happymellon wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because leaving it "to the market" is always a race to the bottom, and there ends up being no choice on voting with your wallet.

Like the iPhone for example? Or maybe the Porsche 911 GT3 RS? Markets have a lot of segments. Government should regulate the minimum absolute necessity. Like seatbelts... who were ironically a market invention/idea first.

Sure, and precisely what the "minimum necessary" entails is up for debate. The EU just believes that minimum to be higher than you do.

Re: Study finds that buttons in cars are safer and quicker to use than touchscreens

#162

Post by [deleted] »

phpisthebest wrote: post #121
happymellon wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because leaving it "to the market" is always a race to the bottom, and there ends up being no choice on voting with your wallet.

You do know that Touch Screen got included in Cars due to government regulations right? The government mandated Backup Camera's and once you had to put in a screen to serve as display for the backup camera then it only makes since to use that screen for more and more things This is yet another unintended consequence of government regulations, where by now people want to use government regulation to "fix" the problems…

[deleted]

Re: Study finds that buttons in cars are safer and quicker to use than touchscreens

#163

Post by CogitoCogito »

PreInternet01 wrote: post #17

I would love to see some EU legislation about car dashboards. As an occasional driver of many different brands and types of vehicles, I continue to be amazed at the usability crimes being committed in the name of 'looking cool' (stated reason) as well as 'cost savings' (most likely the real reason). Any function that needs to be invoked or setting that needs to be changed by a reasonable person while driving should h…

I think the EU should really just force any cars display to communicate with an openly documented protocol (maybe it should be standardized too but at least open) with readily available connectors. And I mean all information that is displayed on the touch screen and all input that is sent back. That way third-party products could potentially replace or enhance the screens.

Of course the US should enforce this as well.

Re: Study finds that buttons in cars are safer and quicker to use than touchscreens

#164

Post by jeromegv »

ajross wrote: post #135
jquery wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carplay (and presumably Android Auto, although I only have experience with Carplay) have the best car maps, and they are unavailable in a Tesla.

That's... no, I think that's just objectively wrong. Have you actually used all these systems? Display latency in the device-remote schemes is really pretty awful, where the Tesla screen scrolls like butter. Obviously no one is an expert on all these things, but I watch friends' vehicles and the occasional rental, and it's really not close. I went quickly to youtube to check, and pulled up this comparatively recent M…

Perhaps they are on wifi or Bluetooth? My civic 2016 with CarPlay plugged in is absolutely perfect and not slower than interacting with my phone.

Re: Study finds that buttons in cars are safer and quicker to use than touchscreens

#165

Post by TekMol »

acdha wrote: post #68
cycrutchfield wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They weren’t talking about Tesla FSD

What they were talking about requires FSD. Car manufacturers have been adding various assistive features but none of them are at the level where it’s safe to direct your attention away from the road.

In Germany, Mercedes has a license to sell full self driving cars (the driver can write emails, watch movies, do whatever they like) that are allowed to enable FSD mode while on the highway and driving up to 60 km/h.

Re: Study finds that buttons in cars are safer and quicker to use than touchscreens

#166

Post by tremon »

dazc wrote: post #152
afandian wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Tesla FSD video[0] the driver spent a lot of time swiping back and forth on the map. If that touchscreen were an iPad, that behaviour would be illegal in the UK. I don't know what the road law is in the US, and if they sell the same Tesla model in the UK. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34268454

[flagged]

man-child

The most worrying increase I see around here is the use of a vehicle as an assault weapon. I think it was popularized by ISIS terrorists (Nice and Berlin IIRC), but over the past year we've had multiple incidents of people driving into crowds or cops over a previous altercation. I cannot fathom why such an offense does not lead to a lifelong driving ban.

But that's not really on-topic when discussing driving controls: luckily, most vehicle crashes are still accidents, not attempted homicides. And for these cases, whether the car has buttons or a touch screen does matter.

Re: Study finds that buttons in cars are safer and quicker to use than touchscreens

#167

Post by Rebelgecko »

dazc wrote: post #152
afandian wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Tesla FSD video[0] the driver spent a lot of time swiping back and forth on the map. If that touchscreen were an iPad, that behaviour would be illegal in the UK. I don't know what the road law is in the US, and if they sell the same Tesla model in the UK. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34268454

[flagged]

Where i live Tesla have caught up to BMWs and Dodge Chargers when it comes to douchey driving

Re: Study finds that buttons in cars are safer and quicker to use than touchscreens

#168

Post by jeroenhd »

cs702 wrote: post #123
acdha wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are not things you need to do while driving. There’s no reason why, say, garage door pairing can’t use a button like my 2006 Subaru does for the one time most people will do it in the life of the vehicle. Checking a calendar is distracted driving and should be illegal.

> Checking a calendar is distracted driving and should be illegal. Tesla vehicles, as well as iOS and Android car UIs, have functionality for navigating to the next appointment in your calendar, if the appointment has a physical address. For a lot of folks, e.g., salespeople and service crews, this is a godsend.

And you can do that, parked on the side or the road, with a tiny LCD panel and buttons on the steering wheel. No need to add a screen for that.

Alternatively, you can use the app on your phone that you probably need as a backup key anyway to queue up your navigation for you while you're safely parked. You shouldn't do this while actively driving, especially if it needs a screen to work.

Re: Study finds that buttons in cars are safer and quicker to use than touchscreens

#169

Post by robga »

The last car I rented wouldn't permit navigation destinations to be set or amended by touchscreen while in motion. It was infuriating as it was the passenger who was safely trying to adjust the destination and we were having to pull over on busy roads to re-route away from closures. Eventually, we found the driver while in motion could use a physical "joystick" in the center console to work the UI. It felt far more dangerous than a few taps of a touchscreen.

Re: Study finds that buttons in cars are safer and quicker to use than touchscreens

#170

Post by phpisthebest »

messe wrote: post #154
phpisthebest wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>in this case consumer safety Ironic since safety laws is what put the screens in the cars in the first place, the regulation requiring backup camera's which required large screen to show the picture. >>in the case of USB-C charging e-waste lol, yea that is not the reason for USB-C regulation, nor was that needed at all, and that will handicap either the EU or global innovation. What ever comes next to replace USB-C…

Amazingly bad takes. > Ironic since safety laws is what put the screens in the cars in the first place Screens themselves aren't the issue. They didn't mandate touch screens, or the removal of non-touch controls. (EDIT: in fact, the removal of non-touch controls in place of touch controls is a perfect example of the market resulting in a race-to-the-bottom cost-saving measure that you're in denial of in your other co…

Talk about Amazingly bad takes.

>They didn't mandate touch screens

ofcourse... they just mandated a large expensive screen that naturally the automakers and consumers would love to have right up front visible to the driver for about 10secs per use of the vehicle and be used for nothing else ever.

This is the kind of "forethought" that makes for terrible regulation, and unintended consequences, I bet you would make for a great elected official, ever consider running for office?

If you are going to mandate some large and expensive be put in a predominant spot of a product, that thing is going to be used for multiple functions, it is unrealistic, and a denial of reality to expect anything less

>>Care to elaborate on what the reason is then? Because that's the reason I've seen given.

I am sure that is the stated reason, there is no actual data to back that up since converters to and from the various charging standards are easily available there is no reason to believe that a device having or not having USB-C contributes at all to ewaste. No one is toss out their iPhone because it has a lighting cable, and most are not even tossing the chargers as for less than $5 you can get any adapter to any other port...

EU addiction to regulation is a real problem.

>>Fortunately, the EU market is too big to ignore.

For now, the EU economy has been largely stagnant since about 2008, Though this year seems to have has a bump largely due to inflation which means it is still flat.

EU is not really a growth market for any one.

Post reply on HN