Live data from Hacker News

The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

theturnsignalblog.com

111–120 of 242 posts

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#111
post #78

My favorite car control system is the BMW iDrive rotary dial. Touch screens are fine for given much more fine-grained access to controls. But they should be limited to controls that you _don't need to set while driving_. It's absurd that it takes 3 taps on a screen -- diverting my attention to the screen -- on my Tesla to turn on defogging (a common event here!) while I can do it with a one touch (now muscle-memorize…

That's odd. I live in the Pacific Northwest and I can count on one hand the number of times I've had to manually turn on defogging. Often my Model 3 will say, "auto defogging". Maybe your humidity sensor is faulty? I agree that physical controls for these things would be ideal, but nowadays the only one that annoys me is lack of the wiper controls. I think even that issue would go away if Tesla used rain sensors inst…

They’ve improved the wiper controls in the Tesla in a recent update.

I haven’t found the “auto defogging” - will check for it.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#112
post #3

I applaud the author for putting thought into how to design digital controls, in contrast to the "just put whatever garbage on a touch screen" strategy most carmakers do today. However, I still question the benefit of this complex, modal control (you have to press a single knob to "cycle between" multiple modes). My ancient, 2016 car features three knobs. This luxury allows me to, without looking, adjust any of three…

Toyota 3 knobs undefeated.

The real luxury for me was four knobs (or often sliders).

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/W9AjhGko2mA/maxresdefault.jpg

The fourth one controls recirculate, and it allowed you to set in-between positions between 100% recirculate and 100% fresh air.

To simultaneously optimize pollution/humidity/CO2 I find I prefer about 80% recirculate and 20% fresh air, but achieving this configuration is impossible in most (all?) modern cars.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#113
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's odd. I live in the Pacific Northwest and I can count on one hand the number of times I've had to manually turn on defogging. Often my Model 3 will say, "auto defogging". Maybe your humidity sensor is faulty? I agree that physical controls for these things would be ideal, but nowadays the only one that annoys me is lack of the wiper controls. I think even that issue would go away if Tesla used rain sensors inst…

They’ve improved the wiper controls in the Tesla in a recent update. I haven’t found the “auto defogging” - will check for it.

The wipers are certainly better than when I got the car 5 years ago, but they still seem to go too slow or too fast in some conditions. I don't have much to compare them against, as my previous cars have all been from the early 1990s or cheap rentals.

I don't remember a setting for auto defogging. My car just does it sometimes.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#117
post #3

I applaud the author for putting thought into how to design digital controls, in contrast to the "just put whatever garbage on a touch screen" strategy most carmakers do today. However, I still question the benefit of this complex, modal control (you have to press a single knob to "cycle between" multiple modes). My ancient, 2016 car features three knobs. This luxury allows me to, without looking, adjust any of three…

FTA

> I discovered thermal comfort depends on four environmental factors: air temperature, heat radiation, airflow, and humidity.

He's managing more variables than those handled by your three knobs, and also deals with seat temperature in his setting.

You might not want any of the finer control, some don't even want climate control and will run with open windows in dead winter. But I see a lot of benefit of his approach for anyone who cares as much as him about climate control.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#118
Perhaps we've lost the plot of both vehicles and computers.

When I was a child, computers were office-based machines, and it seemed, at least, that computers ("bicycles for the mind", "paperless office", "You Will... AT&T") were going to make life simpler, efficient, and leisurely as they took over our menial labor.

But computers came into homes, and just tended to be a plaything where games and pointless activities could be concentrated into your Residential Swiss Army Knife. It seemed promising for awhile, when word processing and spreadsheets and databases could be had. But they really just needed to upskill the everyman--->

If you're productive at this point, it's in spite of these computers, with the complexity and crossed purposes and support difficulties. I could probably just do 16 hour days reading Privacy Policies and paying an attorney to translate them.

I think one end-goal of ubiquitous computing was to offload all those secretarial, clerking, office assistant functions onto the consumer. It's mind-blowing to this guy that ordinary folks could get anything done with paper, a copper pair, and snail mail???

My father would joke at the store: "if they ask people at checkout whether they found everything ok, say yes, because otherwise they'll rearrange the store!" and it rings true with app development and obsolescence, because the drive to innovate and "improve" gives people job security, and produces patents, and press releases to pump your stock. And when the whole chain of tools/components is working this way, nobody can fight anymore. The App Stores seem to gloat when they've updated 23 apps to ratchet up the "let me relearn this from scratch as I simultaneously need a critical-path task to get finished on time"

So what are critical paths on a vehicle? It seems like so many "cushy first class" add-ons that increase the value-add and profit propositions. Perhaps it just maintains dopamine levels enough to cope with a car-based urban wasteland where you only park where you sleep.

I've used so many OS. So many apps. But leveraged tiny fractions of them because the learning curves are insurmountable. What's the average Joe do with malfunctioning computers: consult a 12-year-old STEM student or go to Geek Squad. Eventually high school will just mandate the MCSE/Apple tracks because, computer literacy not being optional anymore, it's not clear how far an 18-year-old can get initiated into the mystery cults and obscure arcana as a Cyberspace Sorceror.

So these in-vehicle computers are maximizing complexity and recapitulating Emacs->Operating System->Reads Mail->MMORPG in meatspace. When I can summon a robot to drive me around. But the edu-info-tainment systems in ordinary cars is nearly getting in our face to make the commute like another 4 hours in the office. Wow!

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#119
post #61
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I don't want a "smart" knob. I'm dreading going car shopping sometime this next year. I anticipate having to rule out a large pool of cars to keep my controls navigable without looking.

Don't forget that almost every car made in the last 5 years reports telemetry (including vehicle speed, accelerometer data, and location) back to the manufacturer who shares that data with third parties, sometimes including insurance companies.

Source?

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Toyota 3 knobs undefeated.

The real luxury for me was four knobs (or often sliders). https://i.ytimg.com/vi/W9AjhGko2mA/maxresdefault.jpg The fourth one controls recirculate, and it allowed you to set in-between positions between 100% recirculate and 100% fresh air. To simultaneously optimize pollution/humidity/CO2 I find I prefer about 80% recirculate and 20% fresh air, but achieving this configuration is impossible in most (all?) modern cars…

It is achievable in every car by cracking the window
Post reply on HN