451–460 of 537 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That doesn't have to be a touchscreen but usually are […] With back up cameras being mandated in the US (and other jurisdictions?): * https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/02/backup-cameras-now-required-... There needs to be a screen: I'm not sure what the incremental cost is of it being touch-sensitive. And I think a lot of designers (or cost cutters) may have figured that since they have to have software anyway , it may e…
I'm pretty sure a touchscreen is cheaper than buttons, or at least awful close. You'll still get some buttons, unless the car maker really hates you, and hopefully something to turn for volume control (which may even work most of the time, if you're lucky).
Touchscreen will probably run atop whatever OS powers infotainment system. In theory touch events CAN be handled on the same 8-bit uC, but converting click coordinates to button-press messages requires knowing what is visible on the screen, which either hinders expressiveness of touch interface (fixed islands for controls) or complicates implementation (constant updating of element-coordinate maps). The moment safety-critical control runs along with non-safety software huge validation challenges arise - the performance characteristics of the whole system, including UI, must become at the very least bounded.
Hard button solution can be internally commoditized, whereas soft button solution requires constant babysitting throughout development lifecycle. One is much more expensive than the other, however, once the move is made incremental cost drops dramatically.
Now, as I face the inevitability of replacing my car due to dubious environmental regulations (current car emits less than modern but twice heavier ones), I'm genuinely concerned about the current state of car infotainment systems. They feel overly complex, bloated, and fragile, prioritizing features over functionality and user experience. The shift towards these systems seems more like a downgrade, sacrificing reliability and usability for unnecessary add-ons that don't improve the driving experience.
Anyone in the same position? What car would you recommend that meets environmental standards but keeps the infotainment system super simple, or even non-existent?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am in that 21%. Heck, I would MUCH prefer to buy a car with no touch screens at all. All I want is a decent car ala 2004ish but with modern crash safety and headlights that don’t suck. I do not care about Bluetooth even! I realize I will not be able to buy a car with no screens due to the backup camera rules. But there is actual safety value in that for me so I’m ok with it.
I agree with the sentiment, but: how do you navigate? Especially to unknown places?
I still drive a 2008 model car with nothing more than a radio and a basic Bluetooth handsfree system, and it's all I've ever needed. When I bought the car, I consciously opted out of a 3500€ built-in GPS, predicting that smartphone navigation would soon surpass it. Over a decade later, that decision still holds up—my iPhone handles all my navigation needs more effectively than any built-in system could. Now, as I fac…
CarPlay mostly works, and although it has issues it's definitely user-focused. CarPlay doesn't prevent car makers from tracking vehicle activity. In the end, consumers don't give a shit about the in-vehicle infotainment. It sucks, or it's AA/CarPlay. The first generation of iDrive showed that rich people people will buy cars in spite of the in-car stuff. In fact, most car infotainment sucks, yet people still buy cars…
CarPlay mostly works, and although it has issues it's definitely user-focused. CarPlay doesn't prevent car makers from tracking vehicle activity. In the end, consumers don't give a shit about the in-vehicle infotainment. It sucks, or it's AA/CarPlay. The first generation of iDrive showed that rich people people will buy cars in spite of the in-car stuff. In fact, most car infotainment sucks, yet people still buy cars…
> why would car makers want to spend millions of dollars a year rolling their own infotainment system? This is addressed in the article: > There used to be a big difference in driving characteristics and technology between premium and budget brands. Compared to a Volkswagen, a BMW used to have a more powerful engine, better handling, and comfort features like seat-heating and cruise control. However, a Volkswagen Gol…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>In the end, consumers don't give a shit about the in-vehicle infotainment. It sucks, or it's AA/CarPlay. My ideal "infotainment" is a button that lets me pair bluetooth and volume/skip controls on my steering wheel. I have a phone mount, like almost everyone does. I don't need a display on my dashboard. AA/CarPlay (and everything else) are genuinely just distracting annoyances that take up space. Especially in newer…
If find the Bluetooth interface too limited because it requires interacting with the touchscreen on the phone. I want to use the large screen on the car with an interface that is optimized to work while in the car not small controls on a small phone.
Perhaps you should reconsider your driving needs vs safety?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cars can have better GPS reception, which is important when you're trying to drive in an urban area with a lot of buildings. Phones are bad at accuracy there. (CarPlay can provide car GPS to the phone though.)
My iPhone 12 has much better reception then my 22 Tacoma even when tossed on the passenger seat. Like waaaaaay better and more accurate
Cars can theoretically have better GPS antennae, and can do better dead reckoning using wheel position and wheel rotation speed. But do they? I haven’t seen any evidence that any car actually does better than a modern phone.
Especially inside a dense city, WiFi location can be much more precise than GPS.
I still drive a 2008 model car with nothing more than a radio and a basic Bluetooth handsfree system, and it's all I've ever needed. When I bought the car, I consciously opted out of a 3500€ built-in GPS, predicting that smartphone navigation would soon surpass it. Over a decade later, that decision still holds up—my iPhone handles all my navigation needs more effectively than any built-in system could. Now, as I fac…
The AA/Carplay experience is incredibly superior to a cell phone clipped into some type of holder. With wireless Carplay, I couldn't even imagine going back to plugging my phone in, or even taking it out of my pocket. There is no downside because you aren't forced into using it.
I guess YMMV. I've recently had the chance to test drive some of the latest models from BMW and Audi, and honestly, I found their infotainment software to be quite laggy and sometimes unresponsive. It felt inexact and bloated, reminiscent of an old Windows XP laptop with a Samsung UI skin. While the CarPlay integration was ok, it still didn’t surpass the simplicity and efficiency of just using my iPhone mounted on the dashboard as a makeshift heads-up display.