Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens • Hacker News Board

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#871

Post by wolrah » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 4:13 PM UTC

Rychard wrote: post #862

patentatt wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess that's what we get when a rotary encoder is much much less expensive than a 4-6 gang potentiometer. And I also feel your pain with the car "booting up" phenomenon. I don't even have a particularly tech-heavy vehicle and upon starting the car the entire infotainment system feels like booting up a packard bell in 1996.

I can't recall seeing a single car that used a potentiometer for the volume control, and I've had cars from the early 90's all the way to today. They've all used encoders. Do you have some examples of makes/models that used potentiometers for volume control?

> I can't recall seeing a single car that used a potentiometer for the volume control, and I've had cars from the early 90's all the way to today. They've all used encoders.

That's because the switch happened earlier than that. Go back earlier than the "DIN size" head units of the '80s and '90s to the "shaft" style radios with two large knobs flanking a center section with an analog frequency display and maybe some preset buttons if you're lucky.

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#872

Post by firstlink » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 4:37 PM UTC

naravara wrote: post #769

randallsquared wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shortening a delay timing has the same effect as turning the wiper on in some rain conditions.

I can't help but feel like we've made a mistake by concentrating so many of the people who design our standard software UX patterns in California. From Tesla designing car interfaces that don't understand how wipers need to work to Apple designing weather apps that don't clearly communicate wind chill to smartphones that require use of the touchscreen to answer a phone call rendering it impossible to answer while wea…

Careful, this is only one step removed from fascistly suggesting that regulations which work in downtown SF don't work in rural areas.

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#873

Post by bedobi » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 4:40 PM UTC

bdavbdav wrote: post #746

bedobi wrote: post #89

Audi have some very recent cars that are completely screen free - they have a screen which completely retracts into the dashboard https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_F2dpj5Kas&t=42s and if you have analog gauges too, there are no screens. (except the tiny one between the gauges which doesn't count imo) They're also completely piano black free. Best car interior maybe ever. Thread here https://old.reddit.com/r/Audi/comm…

Unfortunately these ones arent the recent ones (that A3 has been gone for a couple of years). They went from these style screens with MMI controllers in the centre, but if you buy an A4 or better now, you get 2 touchscreens and no tactile controls for climate etc sadly.

Yup the new ones are trash unfortunately, all screens and piano black plastic interior

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#874

Post by closeparen » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 4:43 PM UTC

sircastor wrote: post #229

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #189

I wouldn't mind touchscreens as long as these imbecile developers would strictly limit UI response time to under 16ms. In no world where you're barrelling 3,000+ lbs of mass at tens of miles an hour should you be distracted by some moronic app or subsystem failing to respond in time because it was written by under-experienced software "engineers." Any software running as a part of a motor vehicle should be federally…

> because it was written by under-experienced software "engineers." I used to be an infotainment software engineer for an Auto maker. There’s this idea in the software industry that because the software behaves poorly on your car’s system, it must’ve been written poorly by someone who didn’t know what they were doing. In my experience it was almost always a matter of the hardware being stretched way past its limits.…

Car infotainment as responsive as a 2004 iPod would be earth-shattering. I refuse to believe that in 2019 the hardware to do this was a material expense on a $25,000 car.

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#875

Post by yellowapple » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 4:48 PM UTC

vonnieda wrote: post #287

yellowapple wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like it should be feasible to add a motor that gives tactile feedback by resisting turning by a little bit (e.g. for discrete power/volume level values within the allowed range) or a lotta bit (e.g. for the boundaries of said range). Re: multi-functional sliders, I do know that motorized sliders exist in the pro audio space (e.g. to be able to program presets on mixers and such); shouldn't be too hard to adapt…

Just FYI what you’ve described is exactly what the GPs video shows. I only mention it cause that knob and video are absolutely amazing and deserves a watch.

Well I'll be. That's what I get for not watching videos before replying lmao

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#876

Post by LorenPechtel » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 4:49 PM UTC

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #189

I wouldn't mind touchscreens as long as these imbecile developers would strictly limit UI response time to under 16ms. In no world where you're barrelling 3,000+ lbs of mass at tens of miles an hour should you be distracted by some moronic app or subsystem failing to respond in time because it was written by under-experienced software "engineers." Any software running as a part of a motor vehicle should be federally…

This isn't about response time, but about what you can do *without looking*.

Everything I generally need to do while driving I can do without using the touch screen. Being experienced with my car I can do it purely by touch, no looking *at all*.

We make a big issue about hands-free use of phones while driving--other than for a new driver I do not believe that matters. I learned on stick, that most certainly isn't hands-free but nobody says it's unsafe. What's actually important is that driver tasks be eyes-free and concentration-free. (And, yes, once you've learned stick is concentration-free.) And hands-free doesn't eliminate the problem of people taking phone calls that require thought--that's what is actually dangerous.

I don't give the slightest hoot about the response time of the controls so long as they count activations independent of the response time. (I click a control 5 times, I care that it actually moved the relevant value 5 but if it takes a second per click to acknowledge that's irrelevant. I'm unlikely to even look at the result.)

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#877

Post by hinkley » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 4:49 PM UTC

AlotOfReading wrote: post #341

hinkley wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even my friends group thinks that Alibaba is a valid source of parts for large scale manufacturing. I've just given up on having this argument. Good luck. Part of having a working relationship with a vendor is that you can ask nicely that they don't sell your designs to competitors or market their own knockoffs. Not to mention you can call them up and say, "I need 10k extra of those next month" and they don't just la…

Don't know how recently you've been in the market, but the days when you could do that in automotive are long gone. Now you call a supplier and they're like "I might have something in a year, maybe" or "I have a few dozen, take it or leave it". The sketchy chinese vendors and the expensive specialty vendors are the only ones with any volume left in common parts, but obviously the former lack any sort of plausible aut…

One thing I’ve learned about vendors over a few decades of professional life and also little vignettes from my father’s job, is that most vendors only wake up when the checkbook is coming out or going back in your pocket. There’s a whole theatrical thing you have to do to be an effecting ombudsman for your company that is effective but that I resent.

I think we can see the Checkbook Effect in how Apple has navigated for the last fifteen or so years. And maybe a bit of the Stanford Effect (anyone can get in if there’s a building named after their family, especially if it’s still under construction).

Hey we want this part

oh we might be able to make 100k a year

Umm… we need at least five million

Gee, sorry.

What if we loaned you some money to build a new factory?

Oh, uh, sure?

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#878

Post by lisasays » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 4:49 PM UTC

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #189

I wouldn't mind touchscreens as long as these imbecile developers would strictly limit UI response time to under 16ms. In no world where you're barrelling 3,000+ lbs of mass at tens of miles an hour should you be distracted by some moronic app or subsystem failing to respond in time because it was written by under-experienced software "engineers." Any software running as a part of a motor vehicle should be federally…

I'd be curious as to where the magical 16ms figure comes from. Yeah, a single monitor refresh. But is that really needed for most UIs?

these imbecile developers ... under-experienced software "engineers."

Yes, I know we've all been conditioned by the relentless pecking order of this industry to direct our ire downwards and sideways, rather than where it belongs.

But in my experience, at least 80 percent of the time the developers (whatever their caliber) are perfectly aware of when stuff is inadequate, and how to do stuff better. Ultimately it's managers and executives who make the call on what to create, and when to release.

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#879

Post by Spooky23 » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 4:51 PM UTC

phpisthebest wrote: post #620

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The judgement should have been against tesla, not the customer. Wipers are essential and should not require fiddling

Sounds like the driver was attempting to adjust non-critical features of wipers not turning them off and on We should be very careful not to include the kitchen sink in with "essential" items. Turning the wipers off and on, is critical, adjusting delay timings is not

Huh? Every car from 1960-2010 managed to provide intermittent wiper controls that were straightforward to use.

Re: Automakers are starting to admit that drivers hate touchscreens

#880

Post by LorenPechtel » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 4:54 PM UTC

patentatt wrote: post #752

acapybara wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our Subaru has a physical volume knob. Its position is only a "gentle suggestion" to the software to move volume up or down. At times, especially when starting the vehicle, there is major latency in the software processing the knob movement.. Also, if the knob is moved too fast, the sw gets the wrong reading. This results in volume being way too high for serveral seconds as well as many other frustrating, dangerous s…

I guess that's what we get when a rotary encoder is much much less expensive than a 4-6 gang potentiometer. And I also feel your pain with the car "booting up" phenomenon. I don't even have a particularly tech-heavy vehicle and upon starting the car the entire infotainment system feels like booting up a packard bell in 1996.

The problem is not a rotary encoder, but how the software handles the signals. That's what interrupts are for, the command should make it into the software queue basically instantly, ensuring commands aren't lost.