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

European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 660 posts

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#381

Post by otherme123 »

generic92034 wrote: post #276
modeless wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Volume is on the steering wheel. A/C is automatic and I don't need to touch it the vast majority of the time. While driving the most I might want to do is adjust the temperature, and since it's not safety critical I can choose a convenient time. It's at the bottom of the screen so it is easy to do by grabbing behind the bezel and only requires a quick glance to align your thumb. In practice I glance at physical A/C c…

> While driving the most I might want to do is adjust the temperature, and since it's not safety critical I can choose a convenient time. That is good reasoning, but are you sure a high number of drivers are also waiting with adjustments, instead of fumbling on the screen while continuing to drive?

A lot of people send and read phone messages while driving. I highly doubt that same people gives a second thought before playing with the screen while driving, unless they are under a real stressing situation (pouring and twisted road at 2 AM).

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#382

Post by jojobas »

fodkodrasz wrote: post #374
jojobas wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anywhere in aviation it's redundant transducers (the thingies that transform rotation into some sort of signal), redundant flight law computers implemented by independent teams on dissimilar hardware, a stupidly robust vote/compare module, I think mostly analog, and usually a last resort direct mode. When all of that is implemented in cars and weathers for 10-20 years I might consider it. Otherwise, seeing as Toyota'…

That is more than likely generated code. Model based development and code generation (by certified toolchains) are the norm in automotive and aerospace.

Nope, all hand-written apparently.

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#383

Post by close04 »

mgoetzke wrote: post #363
OvbiousError wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > Tesla is probably at greatest risk here, having recently ditched physical stalks that instead move the turn signal functions to haptic buttons on the steering wheel.

those 'haptic' buttons are real buttons. with a click feel and everything. they are great (tested in highland model 3)

What people call "real buttons" usually require a certain force and travel to activate. Capacitive buttons require little to no force or feedback, sometimes not even solid contact.

I think the easiest way to understand the difference is to ask 2 questions: "can I put my finger on that button and not immediately trigger it" and "can I can physically tell that I am triggering it (ideally some physical travel)?" If the answers are "yes", then it's probably the kind of button people look for when talking about wanting "real buttons".

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#384

Post by lupusreal »

Apparently "physical controls" in new cars now work almost as badly as touch screens. Turn the fan speed knob then wait two agonizing seconds before the fan speed changes. Gods know what kind of telemetry they stuck in the middle of that operation to gum up the works.

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#385

Post by Hamuko »

ojosilva wrote: post #370
CorrectHorseBat wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, the absence of a physical speed control for the windshield wipers is the single worst design flaw of Teslas. The fog lights are much worse

How about the voice commands for these? ("Wipers 1-slash-4"). I just got my first Tesla, MYLR, and even though it's annoying not having the stalks given the rain sensor is absolute junk the voice command seems to work 98% of the time. The voice command is activated from a button on the steering wheel - it may require a network connection though. I haven't tried the fog lights, it may not have a command, but there's a…

Voice commands are absolutely crap and are never ever a substitute for actual controls. The device can't either hear you, mishears you, doesn't speak your language, doesn't understand your accent, doesn't understand your dialect, doesn't like the tone of your voice or just doesn't like your particular combination of words.

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#386

Post by Kuinox »

modeless wrote: post #292
Kuinox wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have no problem whatsoever with fan controls Fan controls are important to remove fog on the windows. I should be able to enable it without looking away the road.

If you live in a place where this is frequently required, in a Tesla you can put the defrost button on the shortcut bar at the bottom of the screen, where it only requires a quick glance to align your thumb to activate it. Which is actually easier than many cars with physical controls that may require multiple button presses and/or knob turns to configure all of the correct climate settings for defrosting in the curr…

My electric car, a Zoé, have real buttons to toggle the defrost. I know what the buttons are like, so I can jut move my hand until I feel I'm on the right button. I don't need a "quick glance".

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#387

Post by rsynnott »

threeseed wrote: post #33
userbinator wrote: post #16

But the organization wants to see physical controls for turn signals, hazard lights, windshield wipers, the horn Are there really cars where the horn is not a physical button/ring on the steering wheel? IMHO the driving UX peaked in the 1960s, and was largely unchanged into the 2000s, until touch screens started taking over. Compare: https://i0.wp.com/www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/uploads... https://images-stag.…

I think the issue with the horn is referring to the Tesla Model S. And specifically the horn button being capacitive co-located with the voice assistance and windscreen wiper buttons. Which in a safety situation was difficult to locate and press.

> And specifically the horn button being capacitive co-located with the voice assistance and windscreen wiper buttons.

... Wait, is this a real thing, or just a joke about them being bad at UX? If a real thing... goodness, I'm quite surprised that doesn't break some mandatory safety rule.

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#388

Post by jojobas »

fodkodrasz wrote: post #373
gsich wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>steer-by-wire This is the norm for most cars with servo steering.

Nope, ColPAS and ParPAS solutions both normally have the mechanical connection of the steering column between the rack and pinion mechanic and the steering wheel, they mainly differ by the way of introducing the mechanical assist force to the system. (on the steering column, or at the rack and pinion mechanism). They generally have the following root safety requirements: - the assist system must not cause "blocking"…

Why even put it on the bus? Adding a couple of meters of cable per critical system like steering or even 10 for braking couldn't offset the complexity of bus steering.

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#389

Post by Maakuth »

Vespasian wrote: post #372
jwr wrote: post #360

I have a VW (ID.4) and they took the touch craziness to another level. There are things that don't look like buttons, but are touch-sensitive, and there are also buttons, that apart from being pressure-sensitive, are also touch sensitive. Like volume buttons on the steering wheel, where if you try to feel for them without looking, you end up accidentally "swiping" and turning your volume up to the max. The whole touc…

I ultimately decided against an MEB based model because the (steering wheel) UX felt almost unusable during my test drive. I partcularily struggeled with the cruise control swipe-click and hilariously the window switch. The car i ultimately settled on has worse overall infotainment software but physical controls which can be operated blindely and reliably. No wonder VW is already in the process of correcting this dis…

And how much cheaper can this stuff really be than real buttons?

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#390

Post by Vespasian »

hef19898 wrote: post #375
Vespasian wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ultimately decided against an MEB based model because the (steering wheel) UX felt almost unusable during my test drive. I partcularily struggeled with the cruise control swipe-click and hilariously the window switch. The car i ultimately settled on has worse overall infotainment software but physical controls which can be operated blindely and reliably. No wonder VW is already in the process of correcting this dis…

VW went so far into left field with their controls on the ID-series, it is embarassing. Good to hear that they correct.

Just my own thought but I believe they were under immense pressure to achieve similar (or even some) margins with their very first broad market BEV, as they are getting with comparable ICE models.

As a car the MEB siblings are not bad at all and by now the software is fine I hear, but they cut just to many ergonomic corners instead of accepting the costs of getting started in a slightly different market segment.

Post reply on HN