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

41–50 of 242 posts

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#41

Post by rdlw »

masklinn wrote: post #35
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.

Here's a picture: https://www.media.volvocars.com/uk/en-gb/media/photos/47385/...

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#42

Post by residentraspber »

oidar wrote: post #5
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 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.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#43

Post by dghlsakjg »

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…

My 1997 Lexus has a knob that controls the digital climate control. Except that instead of a spinny position encoder, they used a knob with stops so you have tactile feedback for when the temperature is all the way up or down.

This is the kind of detail that I love about a well engineered car.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#44

Post by tiffanyh »

I'm always reminded of the QuickTime v4.0 volume rocker and how painful it was to use.

Screenshot: https://www.macintoshrepository.org/_resize.php?imgenc=ZmlsZ...

Fortunately, it was changed to just a slider in v5.0 as seen here: https://jablickar.cz/en/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Apple-Qui...

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#46

Post by carabiner »

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…

Toyota 3 knobs undefeated.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#47

Post by Terr_ »

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…

AFAICT those were generally modular per trim level, and mainly involved excluding features at lower trims.

What I mean is something that is modular per-manufacturer or maybe even across manufacturers, where customization comes from the arrangement in a grid and what is pumped through each control's little display screen to identify its purpose and status.

> A single car model needs a dozen different button configs, with a dozen different wiring harnesses.

That seems to assume every button/dial will have a direct connection, but I'm thinking the harness would terminate in the block-of-sockets, which would be reprogrammable with logic like: "Analog input in socket 1 controls resistance on wires A and D with the following mapping. When value is in this range, show this picture."

The motivating idea here is: "Can we keep a variety of physical controls while making them cheaper, more-functional, and easier to repair?"

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#48

Post by 0_____0 »

crote wrote: post #31
hinkley wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I've used it for 3D CAD and seen it on The Expanse as part of the bridge crash couch props on the Martian vessels. They also used an older model of Black Diamond headlamp for the space suit lights in early seasons. There's a balance to be struck here - too much reuse of modern objects and it pulls you out of the action. I think the Expanse did it well.

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#49

Post by contingencies »

carabiner wrote: post #46
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…

Toyota 3 knobs undefeated.

Simplicity: are they exactly the same knob, thus lowering ordering costs, shipping and receiving costs, inventory costs, supply chain costs, design costs, and error potential? Quite likely. This also allows upstream suppliers to double down on volume and work to lower costs at their end.

Versus... the designer of a custom complex multi-part powered assembly (manufacturing cost not discussed, cleaning not discussed, visibility in varying light conditions not discussed) who has the fantasy that users want to squint at a tiny screen on a knob while driving, and that pushing all this and associated documentation down a global service network is going to come at an acceptable cost to users.

This begs the question: who's the real knob?

Re: The subtle art of designing physical controls for cars

#50

Post by wnissen »

maxglute wrote: post #38

Standardizing voice control in cars will go a long way until vendors decide to standardize physical controls or car OS. I should be able to get in any car and say "Set heat to X", "Defrost Windows" etc.

Told a rented Telsa "Turn on wipers". It replied that it didn't understand "Turn on vipers". Yes, car, I have a basket of venomous snakes in the back and wish them to be activated! Bravo!

Once LLMs are a lot better at understanding intent, that is probably what we'll get, since it will be cheaper than even bargain basement mechanical controls.

Post reply on HN