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

EV Stupidity Checklist

hypercritical.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 145 posts

Re: EV Stupidity Checklist

#61

Post by Fwirt »

martythemaniak wrote: post #17

Ok, I'll take the bait. I have a thermostat at home, I set a temperature, it keeps my house at that temperature. I have a thermostat in my car, I set the temperature, it keeps the temperature. Fiddling with with climate controls and vents is not something I've done for 8 years now. Why is everybody always touching these things?

Houses are big, the air mass inside is big, convection and recirculation maintain a fairly consistent temperature throughout the house, and the thermostat is centrally located so it averages the temperature of the air. The air coming out of the vents is still often colder or hotter than the set temperature, so sitting next to a vent can be less comfortable. Cars have a much smaller air mass, much poorer insulation, a thermostat that is usually installed in the ventilation rather than in the cabin where the people are, so the perceived temperature inside of a car can vary wildly if you don't live in an extremely mild climate, even as a sibling commenter mentioned, between the back seat and front seat, or between the passenger seat and driver seat.

Re: EV Stupidity Checklist

#62

Post by panxyh »

m463 wrote: post #26
panxyh wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they have a century of experience with critical control design and placement that don't kill people Car manufacturers do too.

∃x car-with-good-control-design(x) but not ∀ cars or ∀ manufacturers and not ∀ cars of any manufacturer

All major car manufacturers do indeed have experience or access to experience in critical control design. The problem isn't in their abilities but in their choices.

Re: EV Stupidity Checklist

#63

Post by panxyh »

bityard wrote: post #51
panxyh wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they have a century of experience with critical control design and placement that don't kill people Car manufacturers do too.

As TFA indicates, clearly a lot of experience on how to make a car reliable and easy to use has been lost, one way or another.

How about some common sense?

Re: EV Stupidity Checklist

#64

Post by kva-gad-fly »

Oh my god!!! Physical on/off siwtches for lights.

The number of times I would curse the EV I drove previously, when I saw a person in front with no lights on, or to signal a semi that it was safe for them to switch lanes....flashing the hi-beam sends exactly the wrong message.

Another annoyance: these days, even low end cars have an `AUTO` setting for lights, that ensures that headlamps and rear tail lights come on when dark, or in the rain, when wipers come on, only to have ppl disable them because they belive they extending their battery life....bah!

Shoutout here to my new car (Ford mustang, not the EV version). Lights are a knob; making changes flashes a toast on the front dashboard so I cna see what it gets set to without taking my eyes off the road; and, to boot, regardless of what I set it to when I drive, resets to `AUTO` when I turn off and turn on the car again.

Re: EV Stupidity Checklist

#65

Post by tbrownaw »

martythemaniak wrote: post #17

Ok, I'll take the bait. I have a thermostat at home, I set a temperature, it keeps my house at that temperature. I have a thermostat in my car, I set the temperature, it keeps the temperature. Fiddling with with climate controls and vents is not something I've done for 8 years now. Why is everybody always touching these things?

> Fiddling with with climate controls and vents is not something I've done for 8 years now. Why is everybody always touching these things?

I'll set the temperature differently if it's cold vs hot out, and in some weather have to tell it to unfog the windshield.

Re: EV Stupidity Checklist

#66

Post by havblue »

Yes, this is a great list and I hate getting in and out of electric vehicles, not to mention figuring the climate controls out of touchscreen-based vehicles. I think the question isn't so much why companies like Tesla deliberately make their cars inconvenient, it's why consumers allow themselves to think streamlined features are somehow better.

Re: EV Stupidity Checklist

#67

Post by laserlight »

fastball wrote: post #35

I think this desire is reasonable, but also completely misses two of the main reasons Tesla did their "everything mediated thru the touch screen" in the first place (besides cost, which TFA mentions). 1. It allows for having "presets" for everything configurable in the car. If you've ever shared a Tesla, you understand this: the driver's seat adjusts itself to the right position, as does the HVAC, etc. Everything bei…

What do presets have to do with the touchscreen? Tesla didn't invent presets. Many cars with physical buttons have had presets.

Re: EV Stupidity Checklist

#68

Post by kefabean »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #31
Animats wrote: post #2

China has already mandated an end to retractable outside door handles and electrical inside door handles. That takes effect January 1, 2027. There were two major incidents where people could not get out and could not be rescued. The powered charger port door would make sense if there were robot chargers that used it. Tesla demoed that, but people disliked the snake robot approach. Technically, a snake robot is ideal…

Rear view cameras are a) 2d not 3d like a physical mirror, so judging depth is inferior on them b) a nightmare for most of us in the second half of our lives who lose the ability to quickly adjust focal length between near and far (not a problem with a real mirror) c) yet another potential failure point and d) a dumbass idea in the parts of the world that salt their roads The various cameras on my polestar2 are routi…

And e) although more relevant for wing mirrors, you can also move your head around to change/increase the field of view if needed. Try doing that with a camera + screen.

Re: EV Stupidity Checklist

#69

Post by yardstick »

There are some - albeit few - cars that tick most of this checklist.

MZS5 EV[1] checks most except the physical buttons, which is a half tick. There’s some physical buttons for some important things, but could do better. The previous model of had more buttons but essentially the same checklist-wise.

1. https://mgmotor.com.au/pages/mg-s5-ev

Re: EV Stupidity Checklist

#70

Post by dj_gitmo »

einpoklum wrote: post #21

Are these problems specific to Tesla, or are most Chinese EV manufacturers also caught up in the "make it so futuristic it's annoying and dangerous" attitude?

I think Chinese Consumer preferences are driving a lot of this. They want things to be as high tech as possible, and don’t seem to care about longevity.
Post reply on HN