Apple CarPlay • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple CarPlay

#171

Post by ZanyProgrammer » Mon, Mar 03, 2014, 1:05 PM UTC

deelowe wrote: post #162

GuiA wrote: post #34

Yay, more touch screen in cars. More ways to distract, frustrate and confuse users who are operating a big box of steel weighing 3 tons and going at speeds the human brain has never evolved to appropriately deal with. 1) Not only are touch screens a very poor interactor in the first place [0], but why do you think planes and other complex machinery have stuck with physical controls? For operating complex vehicles/app…

My stepfather is a pilot. | but why do you think planes and other complex machinery have stuck with physical controls They haven't. Most new planes and retrofits are moving to touchscreens. It allows the pilot to display only the important information on screen at a given time. Like the airport map, for example.

But the yoke, pedals, etc are not touch screen.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#172

Post by mschaecher » Mon, Mar 03, 2014, 1:06 PM UTC

awjr wrote: post #126

archagon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you seriously think we'll have widespread self-driving cars — and not just the bare bones technology, but ones that we can ride in without any control at all, even while intoxicated — within a timespan short enough for every other advancement in car technology to not matter? I am almost 100% certain that we won't see that kind of thing even within the next few decades, if ever. Self-driving cars have way too many…

I think you'll be surprised at how quickly this type of thing is evolving. Google is putting an immense effort into solving this problem. I don't see self-drive cars as a solution for rural areas, but I do see a massive demand for cars in a city, replacing taxis and car clubs. I can even see it being a sort of a 'mini-bus service', for example, noting that you and 4 others are doing a pickup in an area and doing a sc…

I'm from Nebraska originally, and I see a bigger market for self-driving cars in flyover country than in an area like SF Bay.

Lots of long, straight drives with far less vehicles on the road probably even make it more realistic to accomplish bc it's a less dynamic environment. I know 20+ who drive an hour both ways to work...and on the morning drive you can do it and only see a handful of cars if it's early.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#173

Post by mattlutze » Mon, Mar 03, 2014, 1:07 PM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #80

mattlutze wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your gut-check here will turn out to be inaccurate. We will have self-driving cars, and they will come soon. Ultimately, you need: 1. Cars capable of making decisions real-time, on the road, given unpredictable stimuli 2. A network of things, between the cars on the road, to allow optimization and homogeneity of traffic 3. Regulatory environments permissive of autonomous vehicles. All of this is well under wa…

> All of this is well under way and I'd say conservatively we'll see robust networks in less than a decade. I'd say you are being quite optimistic here. Such major changes will be heavily monitored and regulated, and regulations will make it very hard to market any of these vehicles before a long time. 10 years go by pretty fast, I don't think changes are going to that fast and radical. More likely in the scale of 15…

Sage advice from Mr. Gates in his book "The Road Ahead":

"We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next 10. Don't let yourself be lulled into inaction."

There are myriad examples of the amazing leaps our civilization makes in a decade, particularly in technology.

I really don't think my prior post is unduly optimistic, given the pace of the last decade in the auto industry, the continual convergence of the various problem spaces, and the incentives to be the first-to-market with the remaining building blocks.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#174

Post by python2014 » Mon, Mar 03, 2014, 1:08 PM UTC

I'm looking forward to ToiletPlay or iToilet. That beautiful day where multimedia and a beautfully simple solution for wipping my rear end, intertwine as one.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#175

Post by SeanLuke » Mon, Mar 03, 2014, 1:09 PM UTC

hahainternet wrote: post #153

SeanLuke wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> MP3 players were already pretty mainstream when the iPod came around and it didn't really add much. That's like saying that cell phones with color screens were already pretty mainstream when the iPhone came around and it didn't really add much. I think you have forgotten just how different the iPod was. Let's add the Mac to this party. Do you think that the Mac was just reinventing earlier standards on the market?

> That's like saying that cell phones with color screens were already pretty mainstream when the iPhone came around and it didn't really add much. > I think you have forgotten just how different the iPod was. It wasn't very different. Jesus Apple fans talk a lot of shit. The first iPhone couldn't even install apps, stop this ridiculous rose tinted view.

I don't know who this Jesus Apple guy is, but I don't own an iPod, iPhone, or iPad.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#176

Post by kjjw » Mon, Mar 03, 2014, 1:09 PM UTC

Yet another piece of technology locked down.

I can use any iPhone, Android or feature phone with bluetooth with my Mercedes right now. It will sync with the phone using bluetooth standards to display call history, place calls, receive calls, play and list music on the device, display and edit my contact book.

But I recently switched from an iPhone to an android phone - so the next Merc I buy presumably will be a huge step back for me in terms of connectivity with my device.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#177

Post by madeofpalk » Mon, Mar 03, 2014, 1:09 PM UTC

rickdale wrote: post #167

Just bought a 2013 Ford Taurus. My car does all of this and more. I can ask Siri any question, she will respond and its quite nice. I can command phone calls, sports scores, directions, etc. Yes the overall system is a little buggy, but I get it done. This is really just a makeover for a problem thats already been solved. I can't help to think that some of the decisions Apple has been making lately (different colored…

> (different colored backs on the iphones)

Don't forget the iMac which came in thirteen different colours, or the iBook G3 with the 5 coloured shells, or the iPod mini, nano and shuffle.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#178

Post by eludwig » Mon, Mar 03, 2014, 1:12 PM UTC

beedogs wrote: post #147

Am I alone in thinking Apple should be worrying more about fixing iOS 7 rather than porting it to a lot of new devices? It is easily the buggiest version of iOS I've used (4 through 7.)

Probably not, but they are a big company. They can do both at the same time.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#179

Post by bennyg » Mon, Mar 03, 2014, 1:14 PM UTC

gambiting wrote: post #142

GuiA wrote: post #34

Yay, more touch screen in cars. More ways to distract, frustrate and confuse users who are operating a big box of steel weighing 3 tons and going at speeds the human brain has never evolved to appropriately deal with. 1) Not only are touch screens a very poor interactor in the first place [0], but why do you think planes and other complex machinery have stuck with physical controls? For operating complex vehicles/app…

>>(the views in this post are a bit on the extreme side- but that's how interesting conversations get started :-) They are. I know this is an extremely unpopular opinion on HN, but I would like to drive my own car, thank you very much. I don't mind automatic mode on long journeys on the motorway, but other than that, I want to drive myself - and I hope that automatic driving will not be forced upon us during my lifet…

Thank you. The only times I hate driving are long road trips and at night in the rain.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#180

Post by raverbashing » Mon, Mar 03, 2014, 1:17 PM UTC

GuiA wrote: post #34

Yay, more touch screen in cars. More ways to distract, frustrate and confuse users who are operating a big box of steel weighing 3 tons and going at speeds the human brain has never evolved to appropriately deal with. 1) Not only are touch screens a very poor interactor in the first place [0], but why do you think planes and other complex machinery have stuck with physical controls? For operating complex vehicles/app…

"but why do you think planes and other complex machinery have stuck with physical controls?"

Mainly because of technology. But more modern systems are doing away with this.

" For operating complex vehicles/apparatus, you just cannot do better than tangible controls."

You're not controlling the vehicle.

" Knobs, switches, sliders can be operated without looking at them while giving rich tactile feedback, they have no modes = 0 risk for confusion, you know where they're going to be located on your dashboard regardless of what you're doing, etc."

Physical controls in airplanes have caused confusion. Wrong switches have been activated by mistake several times (either because someone bumped into them, or switched the one next to the one intended)