[dead]
Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens
411–420 of 1001 posts
Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens
#412Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.…
A talented software developer should know how to use the phrase ‘no’ Effectively.
And a talented manager should know when to say "Ok. I will find somebody else to do it then. For cheaper". You are easily replaceable.
Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens
#413I 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…
> So what? You've got physical buttons? Big whoop. That physical button that takes 500ms to respond is still as dangerous. No, that's wrong. Problem with touchscreens is that (1) you need to look at them and (2) there is no tactile feedback of whether you pressed it or not and (3) you need to hover your arm in a moving car at just the right spot. Physical buttons cleanly resolve all of these major problems. If the ac…
> Physical buttons cleanly resolve all of these major problems
> Given that with a physical button you didn't have to take your eyes off the road and given the tactile feedback you know for sure you activated/pressed/moved the control
I never understand the "you don't have to look at buttons" argument—my car has lots of physical buttons and to push them, I briefly have to look at the console, find the button, and press it.
If a touch screen interface were properly designed with large enough touch affordances and the correct levels of responsiveness, I'd be just as happy with that as I would a big dashboard full of buttons.
For me, when things get dangerous, its when pressing the button (physical or touch) doesn't do what its suppose to do.
Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens
#414Any controls that's not on the steering wheel is a distraction. If there are very few buttons or dials for very simple/standard/common functions on the centre dash, that's okay. Anything more is definitely not safe to operate in a busy and fast moving traffic situations. All the touch-screen stuff is only safe to operate in very slow-moving traffic jam situations.
Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens
#415I 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 find that the in-built systems are all horrendous and designers create lots of inefficient designs so they look good in the marketing video but are a pain to use.
I have a Toyota and when I want to change the audio source I have to press 'Source' and then it displays a carousel of inputs that I have to scroll through. Or I can press the 'All' button and it displays a neat grid with the options laid out, why not just show me the grid? That's quick and efficient, the current setup is not.
I agree about buttons, if we try and control computers with a button, we will end up with lots of buttons a la 90s ICE system, or a simple interface with mystery button syndrome where you are looking at a screen to see what your button is going to do next.
Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens
#416I 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…
Which button took more than 0.5s to respond?
Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens
#417With. A. Passion. Other touch screens (or similar things) I dislike: - the controls on my stove top - the controls on my monitor - the controls on my tv - the controls on my thermostat - probably more All of these should have physical buttons for the limited number of functions required. Or, at a minimum, for navigation and confirmation. Touch screens there suck. My wife's car has a touch screen on the control/infota…
> - the controls on my stove top
How were these stove-top touch-buttons ever considered an upgrade to their predecessor? They always have no feedback, or that annoyingly high "beep" feedback. They are always slow to respond. They typically use only two or three buttons to control the actual temperature, forcing you to select location first, which is typically slow and terrible as well. Nobody in their right mind can prefer these to the good old separate knobs which we used to have; which my relatively new stove still has (they still exist luckily). I'll add a link to the one I have, for others looking for stove's without the annoying touch controls.
https://www.bosch-home.no/produktliste/komfyr-ovn-platetopp-...
Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens
#418Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So what? You've got physical buttons? Big whoop. That physical button that takes 500ms to respond is still as dangerous. No, that's wrong. Problem with touchscreens is that (1) you need to look at them and (2) there is no tactile feedback of whether you pressed it or not and (3) you need to hover your arm in a moving car at just the right spot. Physical buttons cleanly resolve all of these major problems. If the ac…
> Physical buttons cleanly resolve all of these major problems > Given that with a physical button you didn't have to take your eyes off the road and given the tactile feedback you know for sure you activated/pressed/moved the control I never understand the "you don't have to look at buttons" argument—my car has lots of physical buttons and to push them, I briefly have to look at the console, find the button, and pre…
How many buttons does your car have that you actually have to look?! Mine has lots and I can find the one I want by feel.
Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens
#419When I had mentioned these issues to friends years ago when touchscreens were just starting to come out, I was criticized as being stuck in my old ways. I'm glad people are finally catching on. :)))
Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens
#420Earlier quoted context omitted.
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."?
I know you're getting a lot of pushback here, but you're totally right. Qt (among others) has been a thing in the embedded space for decades, and we've had snappy UIs on sub gigahertz CPUs for decades. I just don't buy that's it's a matter of under specced hardware. I'd actually buy that it's more a matter of the corporate sausage making machine that turns ok hardware and talented developers with good intentions into…
> I'd actually buy that it's more a matter of the corporate sausage making machine
This. The devs don't have a say in the tech stack. The decsion is usually outsourced to the lowest bidder. Other than Tesla and Rivian, I can't think of any OEMs that I've dealt with who have full control over control over their display. Almost everyone outsources it to the Koreans who have a lock on that market – i.e. OEMs send in their designs but it's actually implemented by LG, Samsung etc. From what I've seen, any changes or new additions to any on-screen components has a 2 year lead-time unless (not a typo) it's safety critical or catastrophic in some other way.