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

The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

theturnsignalblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 242 posts

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#191

Post by yial »

nottorp wrote: post #147
residentraspber wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found one good solution to this problem (for AC, at least): go for a car with a good "auto" mode! I hardly ever touch my AC, I just leave it on auto and the car does the rest to get it to the right temperature as quickly as possible. I suspect this is what most automakers think the real solution should be, just make it easy enough to set a temp and leave the rest to the computer.

Maybe in California :) In other places you need defrost, windshield defog etc. I regularly cross our (small) mountains on holidays and that means temperature and humidity outside can change every 20 min on a trip as you go from a depression to a mountain pass and back to a different depression with a different weather. The target temperature control stays unmoved, but i randomly have to turn on and off the defog, for…

Newer cars read the outside temperature, and adjust the auto. I don’t know if they sense condensation on the inside. I know that they sense water on the outside to automatically engage wipers.

I have found even the best ones though, to get the rear defrost right, but fail to get front defrost correct in high humidity conditions that aren’t just normal rain. (Very dense fog, snow, sleet ).

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#192

Post by mihaaly »

xp84 wrote: 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…

I gave up on having decent and reliable design of controls in cars. Even if someone would come up with something having minimal (preferably zero) cognitive disruption that is easy to learn and used to, the constant self-forced and determined nervous pressure of providing new, and new, and very new, and revolutionary, and new revolutionary, and disruptive, will make me re-learn whatever new idea is forced on me with a new car. I dread replacing our 20 yo car. But we have to. Maybe - considering all other troubles with modern cars, like very poor computerization and inherent safety issues, optimization to the level of corruption or unreliability, sales hostility (subscription), nauseating design nightmares - better move to a city and country with decent mass transit system. Could be a win-win for us and the environment. For the missed cases there is taxi and rental. Car dominated societies are not nice to live in anyway.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#193

Post by d--b »

Hackbraten wrote: post #154
d--b wrote: post #124

I take the opportunity to rant about cruise control / speed limit buttons, which have a much worse UX than climate control. If someone in the auto industry reads this: Can I get a button that says 50, one that says 80 and one that says 130. Right now, you have to hit “set” and then adjust the speed limit with some up and down arrows, which is really annoying and takes your eyes off the road. 99% of the time I need 50…

> so if you prefer, you do 1/2/3 where you can set the 3 speeds in the parameters. Please don’t do this. Presets can be super difficult to understand. Configuring them can feel overwhelming, and you can’t verify your presets easily while the vehicle is stopped. > Or at the very least, make the arrows adjust the speed in 5kph increments. Does pressing and holding the arrow not do that for you? I remember (before I wen…

When you keep the button pressed, it will add 5kph per second you press it or so. This is really the worst, cause I can't keep my eyes on that stuff for several seconds, so I always end up overshooting, and fiddling with the buttons way more than what's safe.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#194

Post by Workaccount2 »

d1sxeyes wrote: post #162

One of my favourite dash controls ever was the Saab “Night” mode. Very simple, one press and all of the backlight illumination was turned off except for the absolutely critical controls (speed, etc.). Super useful for reducing distractions while driving at night. Most of the night driving I do today is polluted by light splashing off a central LED on the main console, or dynamic instrumentation on the dash itself. Ma…

In my old Honda I removed every single dash light except for the clock and radio screen. Even the speedo/tach lights (driving stick makes to much easier to just "feel" your speed). Total bliss driving at night.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#195

Post by cormorant »

sklargh wrote: post #183

A bit late but for those of you who still really like physical controls , want a family capable vehicle (I’ve done 3 nights with two under five) and something off the beaten path it’s hard to go wrong with the Audi A4 allroad wagon. Absolutely fantastic suspension and pretty quick for a family wagon. Midrange package gets you adaptive cruise control and all the other safety stuff. Mild hybrid.

Not for long. Next model year it's being replaced by this: https://cdn.motor1.com/images/mgl/L3kENm/s1/audi-a5-avant-20... (via: https://www.reddit.com/r/Audi/comments/1ggr4ox/does_the_2025... )

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#196

Post by msrenee »

residentraspber wrote: post #42
oidar wrote: 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.

I've found one good solution to this problem (for AC, at least): go for a car with a good "auto" mode! I hardly ever touch my AC, I just leave it on auto and the car does the rest to get it to the right temperature as quickly as possible. I suspect this is what most automakers think the real solution should be, just make it easy enough to set a temp and leave the rest to the computer.

So yesterday was a windchill of -5F or something equally miserable. I spent about 20 minutes out in it and then drove home. When I got into the car, the heat felt perfect on full blast as I shivered and thawed. About 15 minutes into my 30 minute drive, my body temperature caught up and I had to turn the heat down to low as I was getting too warm.

A couple months from now, I'll have the same situation, except it will be 95 F outside after a long, hot work day and I'll jack the AC up to get down to a comfortable body temperature. Once I cool off, the AC on full blast will be way too cold to tolerate.

Thankfully, I've got an 8-year-old base model car that allows me to do all that with physical dials that don't take my attention off the road. I can't imagine what it would take to program an "auto" mode that knows how long it takes for my body to reach a comfortable temperature after being out in the elements. I think I'd lose my mind if my car just blithely set itself to 70 degrees and assumed that would work for me. That may be an option for office workers in milder climates, but they're not the only ones buying cars.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#197

Post by numpad0 »

Terr_ wrote: post #18

I wish car manufacturers would refocus from touchscreens (for reasons I will assume everyone understands) to a cost-cutting compromise of modular physical knobs and buttons. Imagine if there was a standard form-factor, so manufacturers could install a 1x4 unit and then plug in a line of dials or button-clusters, where each section has its own tiny display that can be software-controlled to show what it does. Yeah, it…

There are still few models of Japanese cars in Japan that can be ordered without infotainment. It'll come with a warning sticker to not poke your fingers. Those are intended for customers not satisfied with selections of stock infotainment upgrades - there are multiple choices of poverty specs to luxury infotainment units for the same model, in the first place.

IMO, one of contributing factors to ongoing touchscreen apocalypse is "off the lot" model of American car purchasing, which penalizes custom configurations, which in turn eases development of customer hostile integrated infotainment.

If manufacturers can't expect cars to retain stock, standard, integrated infotainment for the life of the car, some of the features can't be implemented by the infotainment team, but must be handled by chassis team to be offloaded to a separate computer. It can happen.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#198

Post by martythemaniak »

Honest question here - do people actually constantly fiddle with climate knobs? I honestly don't understand the whole "knobs are important because I can change without looking", I get it, but are you actually doing this?

I've had a Tesla for many years now, the temp is set to 21C and I don't miss knobs because I don't change this. I prewarm/cool the car from the app so I never enter a hot or cold car, only a 21C car. Occasionally (ie a dozen times a year) I'll change the temp for some odd reason, but rarely while the car is moving. Seat and steering wheel are also set to auto. I just don't think about the temp in my car, but climate knobs seem like a huge sticking point to lots of people?

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#199

Post by drdude »

mihaaly wrote: post #192
xp84 wrote: 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…

I gave up on having decent and reliable design of controls in cars. Even if someone would come up with something having minimal (preferably zero) cognitive disruption that is easy to learn and used to, the constant self-forced and determined nervous pressure of providing new, and new, and very new, and revolutionary, and new revolutionary, and disruptive, will make me re-learn whatever new idea is forced on me with a…

I gave up on cars in the US for few years now... I just bought a hyper electric escooter and use it to travel 60+/- miles per charge... no gas, no insurance, no maintenance (only the rare flats and brake pad changes), and no plate and safety/emission... etc etc.

Buy once, use till the battery dies... rinse and repeat... gear is inconvenient though but can put up with it.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#200

Post by hgomersall »

arkh wrote: post #185
hgomersall wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need any of that. You just need a knob that ranges from make as cold as you can to make as hot as you can and a reasonable fine grain in between. I can find the right set point because I'm literally sat next to the knob and I'm a better control system than anything they can come up with.

And I'm a lazy fucker: I want to set a temperature range and then not bother until I sell the car. Under the range? Heat it. Over? Freeze it. But a range, not a single point. So if the temperature is between min and max, the AC stays off.

I posit you're unusual in your opinion. I mostly observe people use the climate control knob like a heater knob. If it's cold, the set temperature gets cranked up; if hot it gets cranked down.
Post reply on HN