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

The design of in-car climate controls has gone backward

theturnsignalblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 99 posts

Re: The design of in-car climate controls has gone backward

#71

Post by DMell »

moolcool wrote: post #27
tempest_ wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is such a bad implementation. Whenever I am in a car with a touch screen the two things that get me - The car bounces and I miss the thing on the screen I was aiming for - I am low vision I have to lean in so close to read those stupid screens with the tiny UI widgets I hope they figure something better out, I honestly preferred when they were doing the screens with the buttons around the edge.

First, car companies are generally terrible at making software from the jump. The interfaces are always byzantine, laggy, and poorly laid out. There's the small bandaid of Apple Carplay and Android Auto, but then your vehicle settings are decoupled from the rest of the UI, which is confusing and frustrating. I'm honestly due to get a new car, but I have no idea what to get because virtually every car on the market fe…

Unless they have switched recently, the Toyota Camry has a great combination of screen and physical buttons.

https://di-uploads-pod3.dealerinspire.com/toyotaofclermont/u...

Re: The design of in-car climate controls has gone backward

#73

Post by andix »

Pxtl wrote: post #61
fovc wrote: post #36

Please don’t automate the climate controls further. If it’s 20F outside, I’m probably bundled up and happy with 55F cabin temperature. If it’s 85 I’ll be wearing a tshirt and will freeze in 65F. Then there’s a separate issue of the control system being crappy. Even if it’s 20F and you need to heat the cabin to 55F, I don’t want deafening heat blasting in my face for 2 minutes to get there ASAP. I’d prefer a 10-15 slo…

As somebody with allergies and asthma, the "blasting in my face" is always a problem. Blasts of cold air can set off asthma, and there's often dust and pollen accumulated in car intakes.

Spend some money on a good cabine air filter. Especially cheap and midrange cars come with simple ones, that can easily be replaced with activated carbon filters. It may cost 50-100 usd every two years extra, but it’s worth the money if you have allergies. It also reduces bad smells from outside air.

For example mann-filter.com sell also biofunctional filters for many car models. They made a huge difference for me. And worked flawlessly for 2 years.

Re: The design of in-car climate controls has gone backward

#74

Post by germinalphrase »

zrobotics wrote: post #70
germinalphrase wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There must be some bummed out designers in these companies who know better than to mediate all these tactile controls.

Part of it is a cost thing. Automotive grade buttons are really, really expensive. Honda probably pays $1-10 each for a button or rotary dial, a touchscreen is $30-70 depending on size. Plus, backup cameras are legally mandated, so they need to include a screen anyway, difference between a touch & plain screen is likely negligible, on the order of maybe $0-10. (costs are estimated and include the molding & plastics,…

Yea - I'm sure you're right.

Re: The design of in-car climate controls has gone backward

#75

Post by scscsc »

I am surprised so many talented engineers went the touchscreen route. Volkswagen, Mercedes and more recently BMW are going this way. In my experience it is not only annoying, it is a safety hazard. In my old car, I could feel for the button to turn on the defrosting without ever taking my eyes off the road, it was so well designed!

In a way, it feels that the current trend is very much like the Apple laptops at some point, where they god rid of the physical function keys and replaced them with touch sensitive controls. Thankfully, Apple is reverting this change.

I think at some point car manufacturers will realise that it leads to more accidents and they will also reverse course. Perhaps touchscreens will even be forbidden?

Caveat: I was wrong before on touchscreens. I though phones with touchscreens will not work out, but they have. However, it is because we no longer use phones for phoning, but to watch movies, read text, etc.

Re: The design of in-car climate controls has gone backward

#76

Post by andix »

Retric wrote: post #20
bombcar wrote: post #6

Here’s a thing I realized about climate controls that is NOT intuitive - it is not about the temperature/humidity in the car or room! That’s only an accident - it’s about how the person/people feel. So the older cars work closer to that because they basically have the options “blow hot/cold air on me” instead of “try to maintain this temperature”. I can be quite comfortable in a wide range of temperatures if I can ge…

Car temperature controls can work really well, but they need to account for IR radiation through the windows. If the sun is shinning in my lap the comfortable temperature for the air goes down, if it’s snowing outside the comfortable temperature goes up. On top of this if it’s cold outside I may be wearing very warm clothes in my car and not actually want room temperature.

Good automatics have an IR/heat sensor on the dashboard, and use that information in their calculations. I know that Saab already had them in the 90s.

Re: The design of in-car climate controls has gone backward

#77

Post by andix »

MattRix wrote: post #40

“The reason why humidity isn’t included in cars, or most HVAC systems, is that it is not possible for most of us to attach a specific value to the humidity level.” I would argue that humidity control is included in cars by the air-recirculation button. It’s certainly not exact control, but if you recirculate the air in winter everything will quickly get fogged up (and often vice versa in summer).

I think a lot of cars do consider the humidity in their calculations. Also because they have a way to regulate it: with the AC. So even in the winter they use the AC to reduce humidity, and then immediately heat up the air again.

Re: The design of in-car climate controls has gone backward

#78

Post by cjrp »

zrobotics wrote: post #70
germinalphrase wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There must be some bummed out designers in these companies who know better than to mediate all these tactile controls.

Part of it is a cost thing. Automotive grade buttons are really, really expensive. Honda probably pays $1-10 each for a button or rotary dial, a touchscreen is $30-70 depending on size. Plus, backup cameras are legally mandated, so they need to include a screen anyway, difference between a touch & plain screen is likely negligible, on the order of maybe $0-10. (costs are estimated and include the molding & plastics,…

Totally. Plus more pieces to fit on an assembly line, etc.

Ironic that requiring cameras to improve safety has potentially done the opposite by killing off physical controls.

Re: The design of in-car climate controls has gone backward

#79

Post by medvezhenok »

rkagerer wrote: post #8

Are there any reliable modern vehicles with a UI more like a decade or two ago? (eg. physical knobs and a dash that doesn't blind you)

I have a Kia Rio Hatch 2021, and it has the screen only for the reverse / carplay. Everything else is physical buttons)

Re: The design of in-car climate controls has gone backward

#80

Post by voakbasda »

scscsc wrote: post #75

I am surprised so many talented engineers went the touchscreen route. Volkswagen, Mercedes and more recently BMW are going this way. In my experience it is not only annoying, it is a safety hazard. In my old car, I could feel for the button to turn on the defrosting without ever taking my eyes off the road, it was so well designed! In a way, it feels that the current trend is very much like the Apple laptops at some…

I don’t believe for a second that engineers are driving the decisions to use touchscreens. Collectively, engineers have ethics that would prevent dumpster fires like this.

No, I blame the managers and executives, looking to add feature while reducing costs. Moreover, adding this level of software integration permits later adding software locks via an OTA update.

Auto execs wouldn't know ethics if they bit them in the ass. Those individuals should be held responsible for the tragedies that their reckless choices have caused.

Post reply on HN