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

321–330 of 386 posts

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

#321

Post by ajross »

nkozyra wrote: post #206
ajross wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a study. It's a "test" run by a Swedish car magazine, analogous to Car & Driver or Motor Trend, and similarly captured by its advertising base. Auto industry rags have always hated Tesla, for fairly obvious reasons, and it's sort of a running joke within the Tesla community. Does that mean it's wrong? No. But it does mean you need to apply some salt. This isn't first principles science being reported, as y…

There have been a lot of tests and studies about this in the past and they generally confirm what would be self evident.

Links? I'm genuinely not aware of any; certainly none relevant to the auto industry.

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

#323

Post by HPsquared »

ajross wrote: post #318
HPsquared wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Phone holder. The law only applies to using a device held in your hand while driving.

You're saying the law allows a touch screen to be used if it's secured with a "holder" but not if it's.... bolted to the console at the factory?

Why would that be banned? The wording talks about holding the device in the hand. I'm only talking about the recent UK phone law. Previously you could hand hold a phone as long as you weren't using it as a phone. It's now broader in terms of what the devices are, but still only applies to holding something in the hand.

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

#324

Post by phpisthebest »

Eisenstein wrote: post #302
phpisthebest wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>where only a few companies control an entire industry. I feel like we are now into the absurd... You know what kills competition. REGULATION. Every industry where you can cite limited competition I can tell you the regulations that killed that competition. Unregulated industries have LOTS of innovation and competition. Regulated industries have slow innovation and no competition. Free market work because of competi…

There is no fair market without someone ensuring a fair market. Before the FDA grocers were selling milk to families which "was routinely adulterated with water, rotten eggs, flour, burnt sugar and other adulterants with the finished product then marketed falsely as "pure country milk" or "Orange County Milk". People like you went on about how regulation would kill the industry and hurt the market, but what was reall…

Are we reading the same page? because what you linked to is an example of Government shielding a bad actor from liability. At multiple points in the wiki entry they talk about how government protected the Swill Milk factories.

I dont know if that is the shining example of government protection, nor the indictment of free markets you think it is.

>>your Ayn Randian fantasy

Nope, not an Objectivist. I am small l libertarian, very different from Objectivism which is Randian philosophy. Rand hated libertarians.

I am also not opposed to all government, or government regulation. I am opposed to extreme amounts of regulations (like regulation what type of interface a car must have be it touch screen or buttons), and I prefer the government to get out of my life. and I believe we have become a massively over regulated and criminalized society that in large part has created many of the problems we have today such as these huge corporations.

Some basic minimalist safety regulations are ok. Regulation numbers in the billions of pages where no one human can ever know and understand them all... Hard pass on that.

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

#325

Post by kwhitefoot »

jk_i_am_a_robot wrote: post #268

I was shocked at how many keypresses it takes to make it slightly warmer in a Tesla.

In my Tesla Model S it takes precisely one to raise the cabin temperature by 0.5°C; press again and again to raise it by whatever amount you want, or I can use a voice command "Increase drivers temperature" to raise it by 1.5°C.

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

#326

Post by WalterBright »

rootusrootus wrote: post #294
WalterBright wrote: post #287

Why would one need a study for this? It's obvious. I always have to look at the touchscreen to press a button on it, not so for buttons. The touchscreen doesn't always "take" it, either, and I have to try several times.

This gets said a lot, but I'd like to see a study that suggests that people use buttons in their car without looking. It's reasonable to say it's easier to hit the button, and might require less looking, but I'd bet almost everyone looks at the button before pressing it.

You are mostly right. I do glance to find a physical button, but I have to look to find the touchscreen button and keep looking to verify my finger is on it.

It's a large difference in time.

Properly designed buttons should also have various shapes and textures so your fingers learn which ones are which by feel. Airplanes do this - for example, the knob to lower the landing gear is a little tire. The knob to lower the flaps has a knob shaped like a wing on it.

I come from the aircraft industry where this is a big deal, but the auto people go for a "cool" look rather than a "safe and reliable" look.

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

#327

Post by nkozyra »

ajross wrote: post #321
nkozyra wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been a lot of tests and studies about this in the past and they generally confirm what would be self evident.

Links? I'm genuinely not aware of any; certainly none relevant to the auto industry.

Really? Many have occurred and easily discovered with a quick Google. In my grad school CS human computer interaction we reviewed a lot of prior work and individually did our own.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-50523-3_...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cartoq.com/physical-buttons...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/cars/2022/08/ye...

And many more.

This largely confirms something that seems intuitive anyway.

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

#328

Post by WalterBright »

procarch2019 wrote: post #296
WalterBright wrote: post #287

Why would one need a study for this? It's obvious. I always have to look at the touchscreen to press a button on it, not so for buttons. The touchscreen doesn't always "take" it, either, and I have to try several times.

Remember old phones with buttons? I bet everyone over 30 could have texted a someone with their phone under the table or in their pocket. I’m sure there’s some people who could do that with a touchscreen, but not everyone

I patented a phone user interface that used a rocker switch for dot and dash. You could morse code under the table or in your pocket with nobody noticing! It doesn't take long to use morse and it can be very fast and accurate.

With haptic feedback you could even receive morse with nobody the wiser.

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

#329

Post by asdff »

tialaramex wrote: post #71
Ma8ee wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Awareness in my view is useless because touchscreens in auto infotainment are far more visually impressive so they will always be preferred from a buyer's perspective. Except that the HN audience also buys cars, and prefers something else. And we aren't that unique or exceptional.

All ordinary televisions are now advertising-filled garbage, technical people I know just don't buy televisions. If they need a display they buy either the panel or a projector. But if my mother or sister buy a television it will be advertising-filled garbage. There is a tiny niche of people who care, and for some reason insist on buying a TV, as a result on a very small scale it is technically possible to buy a TV w…

All the technical people I know just don't connect the TV to the internet

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

#330

Post by watwut »

ajross wrote: post #204
HelloNurse wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also a difference between taking your eyes off the road momentarily to look at a simple predictable display in a fixed location, like a light or a needle or a fixed text display, and taking your eyes off the road indefinitely to look at a screen that displays something unpredictable, complex and arbitrary as part of an interactive session, usually with animations.

Do you refuse to ride in Ubers, or avoid Amazon delivery vehicles? I have to admit that the level of tech-denial in this thread seems to be getting out of hand. Everyone uses in-vehicles maps. Everyone deploys them on touch screens. They're pervasive and everywhere, and none of the arguments change when you bolt them to the dash. Why is "Tesla" being held to a different standard than UPS/FedEx/Amazon/Uber/Doordash/et…

Did you commented under wrong comment? I can't see how it fits here, it seems to be response to something that was not said.
Post reply on HN