Live data from Hacker News

Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

slate.com

231–240 of 1001 posts

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The benefit of buttons isn't in the response time, it's in the tactile feedback that makes it so you don't need 16ms response time. I heard it click, I felt it click, it clicked. If the thing I wanted to happen doesn't, it's because it's broken and not because I can't tell if I clicked the right spot on my iPad. Not having to take your eyes off the road in these cases is the benefit of buttons, and no improvement to…

This isn't how tactile buttons in modern cars work. You're doing the same thing as pushing keys on a keyboard. The software can still be slow. Turn the physical volume dial on a car with a slow Apple CarPlay interface and tell me how that works out for you. Oh, it's too loud? But it takes 2 seconds for the software to respond due to lag and now you're fiddling with the volume button trying to not make it worse? A phy…

You turn the physical dial, and regardless of the outcome, you know that your input was received by the HCI, so you don't need to wonder if you should try again.

If it worked, great; if not, oh well; no need to look at it and try again though. That's the benefit.

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#232

Saw the Impreza’s 2024 redesign, apparently Subaru missed the memo. https://www.carscoops.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/2024-Su... I recently test drove a Mazda, and while I’ve seen people online complain about their “commander knob” and lack of touch screen, I liked it pretty well. Screen up further on the dashboard is nice for glancing at maps.

The Mazda software works ok with the wheel, but using something like CarPlay with it is almost impossible without taking your eyes off the road for a long time. It’s worse than touch-screens in that respect: what will the spinning knob select next on a screen which has three separate panes?

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#233

"Although they look fancy, Farah said that carmakers can purchase screens for less than $50, making them significantly less expensive than tactile controls."

The bill for replacement when it dies, of course, will be 3000 dollars in parts and 1000 in labor. And the new one will still be just as slow as Android tablets in 2010 were.

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#234
post #209

I wouldn't mind touchscreens as long as these imbecile developers would strictly limit UI response time to under 16ms. In no world where you're barrelling 3,000+ lbs of mass at tens of miles an hour should you be distracted by some moronic app or subsystem failing to respond in time because it was written by under-experienced software "engineers." Any software running as a part of a motor vehicle should be federally…

Most of my time looking at the screen is because I need to look to know where the button is. That's a huge thing, I should NEVER have to take my eyes of the road. Big woop? it absolutely is. Things are still mediocre, and I do admit the lag time should be criminal. but yes, this is a win that could possibly be saving a few lives.

Indeed. Touchscreens are extremely flexible interfaces, but they are not superior in certain use cases, especially where eyes must be kept elsewhere.

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. With a physical button, you know you pushed it because you feel it give and then stop giving. After the first couple of uses you can get used to any response time. With a touchscreen, there is no tactile feedback difference between a button press and a miss. So when you press it and it doesn't do anything, or behaves unexpectedly, you don't know if it is lagging or you missed. Touchscreens are much worse…

the apple Macbook trackpad proves that this tactile feedback could be done for touch screens also. touchscreens are worse but they don't have to be. manufacturers just don't care enough to make them better. they're too busy charging more for touchscreens while saving tons of money on buttons, which are expensive in comparison.

My Porsche’s console touchscreen has a Force Touch equivalent

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The benefit of buttons isn't in the response time, it's in the tactile feedback that makes it so you don't need 16ms response time. I heard it click, I felt it click, it clicked. If the thing I wanted to happen doesn't, it's because it's broken and not because I can't tell if I clicked the right spot on my iPad. Not having to take your eyes off the road in these cases is the benefit of buttons, and no improvement to…

This isn't how tactile buttons in modern cars work. You're doing the same thing as pushing keys on a keyboard. The software can still be slow. Turn the physical volume dial on a car with a slow Apple CarPlay interface and tell me how that works out for you. Oh, it's too loud? But it takes 2 seconds for the software to respond due to lag and now you're fiddling with the volume button trying to not make it worse? A phy…

My car has this problem. I'm not sure if it's CarPlay specific or not because I've never played audio any other way.

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#237

I wouldn't mind touchscreens as long as these imbecile developers would strictly limit UI response time to under 16ms. In no world where you're barrelling 3,000+ lbs of mass at tens of miles an hour should you be distracted by some moronic app or subsystem failing to respond in time because it was written by under-experienced software "engineers." Any software running as a part of a motor vehicle should be federally…

> because it was written by under-experienced software "engineers." I used to be an infotainment software engineer for an Auto maker. There’s this idea in the software industry that because the software behaves poorly on your car’s system, it must’ve been written poorly by someone who didn’t know what they were doing. In my experience it was almost always a matter of the hardware being stretched way past its limits.…

That still just sounds like people not knowing what they're doing.

In no world would automakers say, "Hey you know, we just did all of this tire engineering with this rubber, but let's change the composition at the last minute and not retest all of its physical properties."

So, why should it be any different with software? Because some sucker PM didn't have the brains to say, "We can't actually do that."?

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#238

I’m a former infotainment engineer. Touchscreens made it possible to make modern technologies available, and make them accessible in the car to people. If this results in car makers ditching touchscreens, people will get mad that they can’t use CarPlay like they used to. In my experience, most people who have driven their car for ages can’t use the buttons on their center console without looking at them. Maybe the vo…

Was response time of the screen analyzed at all? Just the screen itself, not what any of the functions a press would trigger.

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#239

I wouldn't mind touchscreens as long as these imbecile developers would strictly limit UI response time to under 16ms. In no world where you're barrelling 3,000+ lbs of mass at tens of miles an hour should you be distracted by some moronic app or subsystem failing to respond in time because it was written by under-experienced software "engineers." Any software running as a part of a motor vehicle should be federally…

I disagree. With a physical button, you know you pushed it because you feel it give and then stop giving. After the first couple of uses you can get used to any response time. With a touchscreen, there is no tactile feedback difference between a button press and a miss. So when you press it and it doesn't do anything, or behaves unexpectedly, you don't know if it is lagging or you missed. Touchscreens are much worse…

And with a physical button I don't have to look to push it. I know roughly where it is and I can use touch to orient myself.

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#240

I like a big display with buttons on the side. I like getting to see the song name, the station and some of that digital info, I like Apple Maps on Apple car play. Those are nice features. I love the back up camera display. But I have to have a button or knob to adjust temp, audio, next track, etc... because while those things are helpful, when I'm going down the highway and I need to adjust while paying attention ju…

Yeah seems like physical controls for input, screen for output is the sweet spot.

Our car UX is becoming terrible for both touchscreens and physical controls. It could benefit from simplification a lot, and I think Tesla had many good ideas, even if they might have over-committed to the touchscreen.

For example, VW cars often have multiple knobs and buttons just for controlling the AC, which is far too complicated. If the car is electric, one might also need to put it into a regular mode (non-eco) to use AC and heating through a dedicated button/menu option. A better solution would be to emulate electric mirror adjustments, incorporating all climate control functions into one single knob - up-down for fan speed, left-right for temperature, and clockwise-ccw for zone/area.

Similarly, gear shifters come in various forms, such as buttons, levers, and sticks, or a combination of both, creating confusion. For example, it's common for AT vehicles to have a parking mode on the gear shifter, but also a parking brake button or lever. Sometimes drive, neutral, and parking are buttons, but there is a lever for multiple drive modes. The most dangerous configuration so far I've seen is where D and R buttons are next to each other. Electric cars, in particular, should only require a simple but clear switch between forward and reverse as their pedals already can stop and go, and many will be effectively parked if fully stopped, they won't roll.

Head units are also problematic with unclear and inconsistent button labels like "Media", "Source", "Input", "Map", "Nav", "Car", sometimes different on the head unit and the steering wheel.

In some cases, like Porsches, there are over 60 buttons within the driver's reach, making it difficult to operate without looking. This is not much better than a touchscreen, it totally distracts you from the road. I would even say that any interface with more than 4-5 buttons in a row that feel the same isn't much better than a touchscreen.

All these issues may not be as pronounced for those familiar with their own cars and are easier to see in rentals. And perhaps they are not big issues, there is still very significant room for UX improvement.

I would like to see more cars go in the way of Tesla and remove a lot that is not necessary. This is not to say that they can't keep buttons. But as I said, climate control could be one knob, the automatic transmission selector could be another. If the parking brake will be electronic, just make the car automatically engage it when parked and turned off. The content shown/played on the media unit could be controlled by another knob - up/down for modes and input sources, left-right to skip tracks or tune radio stations, clockwise-ccw for volume. And then sure, the rest can be on the touchscreen.

To sum up - many buttons (especially when mislabelled or when they handle the same function in combination with other inputs) are also attention-grabbing and inconvenient. Buttons or touchscreens - the UX in cars can be improved a lot.

Post reply on HN