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

31–40 of 242 posts

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#31

Post by crote »

hinkley wrote: post #27
scottbez1 wrote: post #7

Oh, hi, creator of the SmartKnob (mentioned in the article) here - I'm continually blown away by how much UX discussion it has generated over the years! One of the things I regret a bit about the prototype and demo I originally shared is that I used a press action and the screen as a modal/menu interface. The screen makes for a snazzy demo video, and works great for interfaces where you have the user's full attention…

There’s a commercial product that looks like a fancy fancy version of this and I think has a tilt sensor as well. It’s notable not just because it is loved by some media people, both art and video, but also because it’s shown up on the pilot’s chair in several notable sci fi movies/series with an outer space theme. I do want more smart devices with analog inputs and outputs though. I feel like Ambient Technologies we…

Let me guess: 3DConnexion's SpaceMouse?

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#32

Post by crote »

51Cards wrote: post #16

Kudos for to the author for the work put into this and the intelligence functions are interesting. I do have a couple concerns though. A. Trying to design down to two knobs makes each knob multi-modal. This removes a lot of muscle memory benefits requiring a glance at a screen, a small screen that is now partially covered by your hand while operating the knob. Haptic feedback might be able to help you know what mode…

I think the multi-modal stuff can be mostly fixed by dedicated mode selection buttons, which can be blindly pressed to enter a specific mode. The logical option would be to place them around the dial like a pie chart, as that would be trivial to find without looking. Place those buttons underneath the dial instead and you can use the display as a clear mode indicator as well, without the hand obscuring it.

You could also put a copy of the display somewhere in the driver's HUD. It'd still draw some attention, but having it for example temporarily fill up the center of the speed dial (perhaps in some way only when the driver is touching it?) would be a lot less distractive than having to look all the way over on the infotainment panel.

As to B: it's a physical knob, with a motor pushing against your turning force. It'll have zero trouble with gloves.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#34

Post by groby_b »

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…

There's also the fact that most thermostats do manage to keep the sensor input constant, but that's surprisingly uncorrelated with how you actually feel.

(Often due to the slightly bonkers idea that single sensor, often not in any location the user is, will correctly reflect the actual environment)

"Make it warmer/colder" is sufficient input and doesn't pretend a precision it doesn't have.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#35

Post by masklinn »

costcopizza wrote: post #30

One overlooked feature of physical controls is that they also give interiors an identity and experience. Growing up obsessed with cars, I loved seeing how different brands would lay out the cabin. Volvos from the 2000s used a rather large diagram of a seated person to select the HVAC vent for example. Also, in my brain, a 3000+ pound object just dang requires some stuff to physically press, push, and hear click! A co…

> Volvos from the 2000s used a diagram of a seated person to select the HVAC vent for example.

… don’t all cars do this? I can’t remember seeing anything other than that to represent which vents are active.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#36

Post by crote »

pmontra wrote: post #17

A very tangential note about this: > Much like a door handle should communicate whether to pull or push a door, For many common doors it's not the handle, it's the frame. Standing on one side of the frame we see that the door is free and we can pull it. On the other side we see that the door hits the frame and we must push it.

Yeah, but it's not supposed to. With good design it is immediately obvious whether the door is push or pull - even when the frame doesn't have any clear indications. For example, the door in [0] (apologies for the YT short) has no immediately clear hints if you look at the frame or handle.

Both sides look exactly the same, so how are you supposed to know? Add a "push/pull" sticker you'll miss 90% of the time?

The Vox vodcast(?) in [1] goes a lot further into the problem, starting from a very similar door. The solution is pretty simple, in hindsight: if they designed the door properly, you won't even be able to pull on a push door. Have a pull handle on the pull side, and a push plate on the push side.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/oJnEjV8vQJg

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY96hTb8WgI

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#37

Post by groby_b »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #11

Car manufacturers, please hire this guy to build your interfaces. He gets it. Touch screens must not be used for controls you are going to frequently operate while driving the car, it's maximum unsafe.

I wish that was the unsafest thing car manufacturers did.

Jeep, for example, has just discovered a predilection for random full-screen alerts with a blaring alarm sound, if, for example, they magically inferred there's a tow-truck somewhere. (There's about a 50% chance you'll encounter a tow truck in the next 10 minutes, at best)

This is great if, say, you're three hours into a night drive, all alone on the road, and suddenly ALARM THE WORLD IS ENDING.

I actively hate car manufacturers. They should not be allowed to use touch screens. Even if they could be useful - they have repeatedly proven they are too stupid to use them well.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#39

Post by crote »

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…

Cars used to have modular buttons. It was very common to have a couple of blanks in your infotainment cluster.

The problem is that it still requires custom per-feature assembly. A single car model needs a dozen different button configs, with a dozen different wiring harnesses. That's a lot more expensive than a simple one-size-fits-all touch screen you install into literally every single car and configure with a software flag.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#40

Post by reaperducer »

crote wrote: post #39
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…

Cars used to have modular buttons. It was very common to have a couple of blanks in your infotainment cluster. The problem is that it still requires custom per-feature assembly. A single car model needs a dozen different button configs, with a dozen different wiring harnesses. That's a lot more expensive than a simple one-size-fits-all touch screen you install into literally every single car and configure with a soft…

Cars used to have modular buttons. It was very common to have a couple of blanks in your infotainment cluster.

My brand-new luxury-brand EV still has blanks. Not all trim levels get the rear fog lights, or a few other things I can't remember. Also, they're used for buttons related to adding the towing package.

Post reply on HN