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

Mercedes-Benz commits to bringing back physical buttons

drive.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 523 posts

Re: Mercedes-Benz commits to bringing back physical buttons

#211

Post by NetMageSCW »

Barbing wrote: post #74
aenis wrote: post #47

'He also explained that "I'm a big believer in screens, because I really believe if you want to connect, you have to make the magic work behind the screen." ' I am a big believer in keeping "product people" away from UI design for dangerous machinery. The eyes and the attention of the driver should be on the road. All the audio visual noise from the car is just plain dangerous. I don't want my car to draw my attentio…

The low fuel, low wiper fluid, and forward collision warnings sound like they were all implemented a little clumsily. What do you think the best implementation would look like? Seems it would still have to strike a balance. It's dangerous to tell the driver they're low on fuel if we distract them. But it's also dangerous for a driver to run out of fuel on the highway if we didn't catch their attention. Also guessing…

My car has only a small dashboard screen with some information and when something is alarming it is colored yellow or red for significance and pops up filling the screen, then after a little while minimizes to a little warning icon corresponding to the issue matching the color. Or I can hit a close button on the steering wheel.

Re: Mercedes-Benz commits to bringing back physical buttons

#212

Post by Barbing »

lpcvoid wrote: post #118
Barbing wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MUST include the elderly. Big Tech, WTF guys you let gen-z/millennials design your interfaces and ship w/e works for them alone? Seniors have money and can’t use your products

Well, seniors get everything else handed to them in this world, so I don't shed many tears when they are left out for once.

Some deserve our wrath but it’s tough for a lot of them out there! From USA:

  The U.S. Census Bureau's latest data, released today, show that the poverty rate continues to rise among older adults, reaching 15%.

  This rise in economic challenges comes as recent cuts to benefits programs, like SNAP and Medicaid, will inevitably leave more older adults without funds to afford basic costs of living, including medications, health care visits, and food.
https://www.ncoa.org/article/poverty-among-older-adults-keep...

Re: Mercedes-Benz commits to bringing back physical buttons

#213

Post by aenis »

ajross wrote: post #181
aenis wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"So, that's attractive as a slogan but it's 100% incorrect in practice. Non-road UI features like backup cameras and blind spot warning alarms save lives. Period." The "on the road" extends to mirrors (or screens that have replaced it) - I assumed that was obvious.

So screens can replace "mirrors" and not "buttons"? Seems like excuse-making to me. I repeat: I'd prefer to see more analysis and less sloganeering, especially where you "assume that was obvious".

My argument was to keep the attention of the driver on the road. To that end, I don't care whether I am looking at a physical mirror or a screen that replaced one (as long as its good, high res, low latency screen) - I am looking in the direction I am driving and focused on steering the vehicle.

For the same reason I don't mind (in fact, I appreciate) the silent helpers such as ABS, ESP, 4x4 and so on - all of those systems exist, work, and never utter as much as a beep to distract me. Great.

Popups, imbecillic charging/energy distribution animations, elaborate sequences needed for basic functions such as AC controls, are the things I don't like. Sure, people designing this stuff should engage in research, but some things are actually obvious. Such as the need to mind the mirrors when reversing.

Re: Mercedes-Benz commits to bringing back physical buttons

#214

Post by Forgeties79 »

m_fayer wrote: post #209
singleshot_ wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you want to connect, you have to make the magic work behind the screen. What if you don't want to connect? What if you just want to go somewhere? Why would a car be tasked with connecting?

Might sound hyperbolic but this is clearly the softly smiling fascist menace of the corporate regime. A gentle friendly assumption that we are all eager to partake in “euphemism for platform-serfdom”. Our desire to “connect/share/express/etc” is simply taken for granted. And what if you just don’t want to? We’re sorry, but that’s simply not an option.

All I hear is you hate connecting with people.

Re: Mercedes-Benz commits to bringing back physical buttons

#216

Post by NetMageSCW »

mechanicalpulse wrote: post #152
Barbing wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The low fuel, low wiper fluid, and forward collision warnings sound like they were all implemented a little clumsily. What do you think the best implementation would look like? Seems it would still have to strike a balance. It's dangerous to tell the driver they're low on fuel if we distract them. But it's also dangerous for a driver to run out of fuel on the highway if we didn't catch their attention. Also guessing…

> a little clumsily s/a little/very/; > What do you think the best implementation would look like? We already had one! Dashboard indicator lamps have been an international standard (ISO 2575) since 1982. > But it's also dangerous for a driver to run out of fuel on the highway if we didn't catch their attention. Yes, it is. But the key word is "if". The product folks involved in making these UI/UX decisions were more…

I don’t look at the field guage when I get into the car and start it - I already know about how much fuel is in the car since I drove it last.

Re: Mercedes-Benz commits to bringing back physical buttons

#217

Post by NetMageSCW »

smugma wrote: post #128
hephaes7us wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For years, vehicles have had a little light that comes on when you are below about 50 miles of range. It's next to the fuel gauge. I've always heard it called the "walk light", which I presume is a reference to the fact that, if you don't do something, you may have to start walking soon. My car has a little screen in the dash where it usually shows my range, or the current temperature - information that I check when…

Forward and rear collision warnings have saved me several times in 3 different cars, including slamming on the brakes as I was backing up and then a MUNI bus that I didn’t see flew by. I’ve also been in 4 accidents that were my fault (one on the same street, a MUNI bus blocked my view of another car that had the right of the way) and 2 that weren’t but I wasn’t able to avoid them. I will always buy a new car with the…

>one on the same street, a MUNI bus blocked my view of another car that had the right of the way

Simple, fundamental rule: never go when you can’t see. Follow religiously.

Re: Mercedes-Benz commits to bringing back physical buttons

#218

Post by NetMageSCW »

yoyohello13 wrote: post #124
Barbing wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The low fuel, low wiper fluid, and forward collision warnings sound like they were all implemented a little clumsily. What do you think the best implementation would look like? Seems it would still have to strike a balance. It's dangerous to tell the driver they're low on fuel if we distract them. But it's also dangerous for a driver to run out of fuel on the highway if we didn't catch their attention. Also guessing…

Those warnings just don’t need to exist. I have a car from 2002, it has none of those and it’s fine, totally fine. There is a fuel gauge I look at to see my fuel level, when I’m out of wiper fluid it just doesn’t work (I have extra in my trunk so no big deal). I don’t need a noise to tell me there is a car in front of me, I’ve been driving this car every day for 15 years with no accidents so obviously a collision ala…

Carrying around extra wiper fluid went out at the beginning of the 20th century.

Re: Mercedes-Benz commits to bringing back physical buttons

#220

Post by goosejuice »

tw04 wrote: post #133

Tesla removed as many physical buttons and controls as possible to reduce cost and called it revolutionary. Their faithful parroted it because they loved Tesla. Other manufacturers tried to copy it, and when any normal person had to interact with touch everything - the real opinions of how absolute garbage it was came out. Having a big screen to display navigation and audio is awesome. Removing things like physical v…

Common argument on the internets, but meh, I think most of it is totally fine and I prefer it to my other car with buttons galore.

I do enjoy physical controls for things that are constantly being used while driving for safety purposes and all of that exists for my model. Dropping stalks was too far imo, but for a car maker that wants to remove the driver it's not surprising. Mine has two stalks and I think that's the Goldilocks version. The auto shifter is surprisingly good though.

Everything else in the Tesla is completely fine where it is. Even if I do need to reach for something there's always voice. Saying I'm hot/cold or take me to X or play my playlist or whatever works completely fine. If it's not, just adjust it when you stop like you should be doing anyway.

Plenty of things to dislike about my car but this isn't one of them. The only button, or a thing a button replaced, that is missing on my car is the manual door release in the back which is a pretty egregious omission that does make me a tad angry. I'm going to have to drill a hole in my door for that one.

Post reply on HN