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

451–460 of 660 posts

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

#451

Post by throwaway82063 »

oblio wrote: post #287
nly wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been driving for 15 years and only ever used my horn once.

And in that situation it probably was easy to use because most likely you REALLY needed it, which these laws are trying to make sure happens: it's easily accessible.

I disagree, whenever in the past I needed to use the honk, I've failed to do so because it's hard to press and requires you to take one hand off the wheel, which is the last of your instincts when you panicking, or both if you are juggling your gearstick.

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

#452

Post by bengale »

mhandley wrote: post #95
infotainment wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you seen the other BEVs available in America? There really isn't much choice if you don't want an SUV -- your options are basically a Tesla or a Chevy Bolt.

Perhaps the BMW i4? https://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/all-electric/i4/gran-coupe/o...

Great car. Suffers from some of the touchscreen-itis but nowhere near the Tesla nonsense. Not even in the same ballpark.

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

#453

Post by RHSeeger »

maccard wrote: post #302
iforgotpassword wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But even then, how do you find the A/C or volume control on a touch screen without taking your eyes off the road, without accidentally touching something else? You just can't feel your way to the volume knob. Sure, you are a responsible driver and would only do that at a traffic light or other completely safe situation, but I don't know how many accidents touch controls in cars already caused with less responsible dr…

> You just can't feel your way to the volume knob Yes you can. My last three cars have had a volume knob under the left thumb. My current car has a second volume knob behind the gearstick, and the A/C is the only analog dial along the center console. I can easily adjust both without looking away.

I have volume controls and similar on my steering while, and I never use them.... because I can never remember which is where. I prefer my stereo controls to be in the stereo controls area, my climate controls to be in the climate control area, etc. Spreading them out makes it more annoying to deal with.

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

#454

Post by klausa »

modeless wrote: post #334
klausa wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's at best marginally easier to hit a random physical button on the center console than to hit a single button on the bottom bar of a Tesla screen You presumably typed this out on a keyboard of some sort. Which one can you do more confidently and reliably without looking: — hitting the "u" key on a physical keyboard without looking — hitting the "u" key on a touchscreen keyboard on your most used mobile device?

I can touch type and hit 'u' without looking, sure. But only if my hands start on the home row. This has no relevance for the situation under discussion. I cannot hit the 'u' key on a physical keyboard confidently and reliably without looking if it is mounted on the center console of a car and I am driving with my hands starting on the steering wheel . I always look to position my hand to hit those buttons. Meanwhile…

>I can touch type and hit 'u' without looking, sure. But only if my hands start on the home row.

The keys have bumps to let you know when your hands are in the right place.

Similar affordances exist in many cars. Even where they don't; the much smaller amount of them makes remembering things like "the third button from the left mutes the audio" and finding it by touch entirely possible.

Look, I'm not trying to argue that touchscreens are useless or whatever — if you like your touchscreen, fine, whatever, your problem.

But claiming that they're _as easy_ to use without looking as button is just not believable.

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

#455

Post by pzduniak »

peeters wrote: post #154
dzhiurgis wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obvious limitation is something like Maps and media. My guess ones that use mechanical dials (i.e. Lexus until ~ year ago) cause more distraction than touchscreen by simply being harder to use and taking more time to solve your problem. Given how well chatgpt's voice recognition works - why not just put it on all cars!

I've only used a Lexus that had a touchpad. I do however regularly use a Mazda with its commander knob, and it is far safer than a touchscreen in my opinion. You can do most navigation without looking at the screen, with just an occasional glance to confirm you're doing what you think you're doing. Whereas a touchscreen requires constant attention while you're manipulating the screen. The only thing that annoys me ab…

>Google's baffling regression in handling voice input for common tasks while driving

Is it just me or is Google Maps voice input in AA completely busted now? I used to be able to press the "Search" bar on the touch screen in the app, say the search term and it would just show the results. Likewise for adding stops along the way. Now for the former I need to explicitly say "navigate to X" (or it says that it doesn't have a screen and refuses to do anything???) and for the latter I have to say something like "add a navigation stop at X", the assistant lists our the result (??????) and asks me which one I want to choose. Of course I don't see anything on the map in either case.

I can't imagine how bad it is when you

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

#456

Post by RHSeeger »

Slartie wrote: post #326
ClikeX wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Volume control is a very commonly used feature in cars. That should definitely should be a physical button. I drive a Lynk & Co (reskinned Volvo XC40) and it has a rotary knob on the center terminal for fan speed, temperature, and volume. Which are all within reach without me having to look or lean over. There's also a volume button on the steering wheel next to my thumb, which is great. The only annoying part is tha…

But you are not legally required to use the volume control regularly in order to drive safely. You are not even legally required to have any kind of volume control in your car. You are legally required to have and use the turn signals. You are legally required to have and use the windshield wipers (because you need to be able to see the road when it's raining). Same is true for the horn and hazard lights - those are…

Being able to use your phone to talk to people is not safety critical either. And yet, we make laws to lower the amount of physical interactions required with the phone while driving. Because people _do_ use them in ways that negatively impacts safety, both for themselves and other people on the road.

The question isn't whether or not the interface needs to be interacted with at times when it would be a safety issue. The question is whether or not the interface _will_ be interacted with in a way that would be a safety issue. And how much of a safety issue that is to _other_ people. And what better options there are to prevent those issues.

"People can use it responsibly" is not a viable strategy here, when the (many) bad actors injure and kill 3rd parties.

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

#457

Post by drooopy »

Systems that are vital to the operation of a moving vehicle should never under any circumstances force the driver to take their eyes off the road even for a split second to interact with them. It's mindblowing that this was even allowed to happen in the first place.

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

#458

Post by magicalhippo »

macNchz wrote: post #212
user_7832 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I really miss the feel of a physical throttle linkage on the snow and ice, I feel it's much more difficult to judge grip. The throttle is separated from the wheels/ground by the transmission and the whole engine, which makes me wonder if the response you felt probably was a combination of eg rpm/physical vibration and a few other factors. It should be possible to recreate these even in an EV, then.

There is a noticeable difference in feel between ICE cars with physical throttle cables and those with electronic throttles…the drive-by-wire models have a very small amount of lag between pedal input and engine response. If you’re attuned to it, or drive “spiritedly”, the effect is quite noticeable. I think mainstream cars mostly switched over around 20 years ago, I remember learning about it when I googled for why…

> one of which is simply increasing efficiency by smoothing the accelerator input a bit

Right, it feels very much like I'm just changing a set-point. Putting the car in eco mode makes it very noticeable, but even though it's less noticeable in sport mode it's still not the same.

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

#459

Post by RHSeeger »

Slartie wrote: post #340
harry8 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Volume control is pretty damn safety critical when the driver takes their eyes off the road to jab at the f&^king miserable touchscreen and accidentally wipes out your family. Sir Issac Newton wrote down the laws about piloting a couple of ton of steel some time ago. Very unlikely to be repealed. Every control that will be used by the driver for any purpose whilst the vehicle is in motion is safety critical.

That is true, but in that mind your kid in the back seat is safety-critical, so maybe we mandate no kids in the back? Or your wife next to you in the passenger seat, she could also make you remove your eyes from the road (happens quite a lot actually) - mandate no wifes in the passenger seat anymore? You need to draw a line, otherwise really anything in your car can be safety-critical, you just need to imagine the ri…

> That is true, but in that mind your kid in the back seat is safety-critical, so maybe we mandate no kids in the back? Or your wife next to you in the passenger seat, she could also make you remove your eyes from the road (happens quite a lot actually) - mandate no wifes in the passenger seat anymore?

You're being intentionally obtuse. Like everything else, this is a question of what options we have to make things safer. "Not allowing children in cars" isn't reasonable, because there isn't a simple alternative. Using controls that require less attention focus is reasonable.

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

#460

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

kevincox wrote: post #405
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…

> The machine was rather difficult to operate. For years radios had been operated by means of pressing buttons and turning dials; then as the technology became more sophisticated the controls were made touch-sensitive--you merely had to brush the panels with your fingers; now all you had to do was wave your hand in the general direction of the components and hope. It saved a lot of muscular expenditure, of course, bu…

Can people please stop implementing ideas that were intended as satire?
Post reply on HN