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

Apple CarPlay

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 376 posts

Re: Apple CarPlay

#301

Post by baddox »

lutusp wrote: post #95
baddox wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is accidentally technically correct. Saying that "the human brain evolved to do x" implies that evolution has purpose or intention, which is not the case.

> He is accidentally technically correct. Saying that "the human brain evolved to do x" implies that evolution has purpose or intention, which is not the case. But to say that human behavior evolved to meet a specific environmental requirement isn't a purpose, it's an outcome that allowed the genotype to procreate. It's a gray area and one must be careful speaking of goals, but if one is addressing a specific adaptat…

Sure, but then you could apply the statement to anything new enough that there hasn't been anywhere near enough time for adaptations to evolve. The human brain certainly didn't evolve to read books, or do computer programming, or fly airplanes, or play chess. The trick is that the human brain did evolve (according to your interpretation of the phrase) to solve general problems and maintain strong and complex social bonds, which happens to lend itself to many things, including reading books, playing chess, etc.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#302

Post by deveac »

ed209 wrote: post #296
deveac wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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. This reduces distraction. You have to remember to take into account human behavior. In the real world, people get into their vehicle and use their phone's map application, as well as text, phone, and m…

In 2011, 3,331 people were killed in crashes involving a distracted driver. 3,267 in 2010. [1] When you say "This reduces distraction." you mean compared to holding the phone and doing those actions, right? The way I would account for human behavior is to intelligently disable certain functionality as the car is moving. Compared to someone else's life, how important is that text message? Even dictating a text message…

>The way I would account for human behavior is to intelligently disable certain functionality as the car is moving. Compared to someone else's life, how important is that text message?

Thereby ensuring a situation where the person takes their eyes off the road and looks at their seat for their phone, picks it up, and starts reading and replying to texts while barreling down the road in a high velocity chunk of steel.

That's what happens now. Apple's technology aims to prevent that.

>Even dictating a text message takes some cognitive load.

Yes it does. It also is much safer than doing it on your phone as people can and will continue to do, even in states where it is illegal. Apple isn't a legislature. They can't tackle unsafe driver behavior by crafting laws, but they can do so via software offerings.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#303

Post by jjtheblunt »

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…

"white men"? Why malign the minority in tech, people of European ancestry.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#304

Post by benst »

I really like the sound of this feature, but until it becomes more widely available I'll continue using "Harken For iPhone" in the car. It's much easier to use than Apple's music player (bigger text, large buttons/touch areas). There's also "Harken" on the iPad but I need a new cradle for my iPad so I can't use it at the moment.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#305

Post by dba7dba »

chipotle_coyote wrote: post #49
dba7dba wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't blame car companies for resisting change. They can't send out patches. Their product life cycle is a few years, maybe even a decade, not a year... Funny to see Hyundai called a great marquee by apple... In S Korea, Samsung is considered THE marquee company and Hyundai Motor is a few steps below it...

Going to go out on a limb here and say that Samsung will not be one of Apple's partners on this project. I'm over in the States, but are you sure that's really true about Samsung Motors, by the way? After about ten minutes of searching just now, the story looks very different -- Samsung may be a marquee brand in most other markets, but it looks like they're a complete disaster as an auto company. Renault took majorit…

Sorry I wasn't clear about my statement. I meant in S Korea in general Samsung as a brand is considered a notch above Hyundai brand.

I wasn't talking about car business. Just in general Samsung is considered more sophisticated and a brand notch above Hyundai.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#306

Post by e15ctr0n »

brianbreslin wrote: post #289

I wonder if Ford will upgrade existing microsoft sync systems to work with this?

Ford will switch to BlackBerry's QNX Neutrino real-time operating system[0] and the QNX CAR infotainment platform[1] for the next generation of Sync coming out in 2016[2][3].

[0] http://www.qnx.com/products/neutrino-rtos/neutrino-rtos.html

[1] http://www.qnx.com/products/qnxcar/

[2] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-22/ford-said-to-swap-b...

[3] http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230461040...

Re: Apple CarPlay

#307

Post by jakobe »

joosters wrote: post #290
lutusp wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, more interesting, a correlation between innumeracy and traffic deaths. It turns out that the distance required to bring a car to a stop (after reaction time) is proportional to the square of the vehicle's speed. This is something that most people don't know, and that young drivers ignore at their peril. After the driver reacts and presses on the brake pedal, on dry, level pavement, a car requires about 20 feet to…

Is that relevant? Most fatalities are not because the car drove straight into a stationary object directly in front of them on the road. So, total stopping distance doesn't come into play as you describe it. Collisions mostly happen because of the actions of car drivers who are going roughly the same speed as you. Not saying that speed is a factor, just that stopping distance isn't the thing. Perhaps you should discu…

Stopping distance is extremely important. Here are a few examples of typical car accidents:

- a driver in foggy weather crashes into a traffic jam

- a car crosses an intersection at a red light, is hit by a car from the other direction

- car hits a child running on the street

- driver looses control, hits a tree at 60mph

- reckless driver tries to overtake, hits car coming their way

These types of accidents are the most lethal, and they are all due to stopping distance (and could be avoided by driving at a lower speed)

Re: Apple CarPlay

#308

Post by aeonsky »

hahainternet wrote: post #125
coldtea wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For at least 15 years or so, that's just cargo cult BS Europeans who haven't tried automatic transmission cars say.

Yeah dude it's totally because we haven't tried them. It's not because they're 'intelligent' pieces of shit with virtually no control or anything.

While in motion, a driver should maintain 100% of their focus on two things: direction and speed. Having to juggle another pedal and lever to make sure upcoming speed change would be suitable to the driver is unnecessary and a distraction. Modern cars perform gear changes good enough, at the worst. If you have a CVT, it is even better (but very expensive to buy/repair, I acknowledge that).

Re: Apple CarPlay

#309

Post by e15ctr0n »

PaulMest wrote: post #21

Why aren't they announcing this at an event? I can't recall Apple releasing something like this without some type of fanfare and subsequent media push.

It was announced at the 84th International Geneva Motor Show where Volvo, Mercedes, and Ferrari live demo-ed the Apple CarPlay system.

https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2014/03/03Apple-Rolls-Out-C...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Motor_Show

Re: Apple CarPlay

#310

Post by hemaljshah »

This feels like a use case to get rid of any of the iPad mini screens so they can come in with a bigger iPhone. The UI looks really boring and how would this connect with different versions of the iPhone?

Definitely not onboard with providing drivers another distraction in the car.

Post reply on HN