Buttons Beat Touchscreens In Cars, and Now There's Data To Prove It (arstechnica.com) 142
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: [Swedish car publication Vi Bilagare] tested 11 new cars alongside a 2005 Volvo C70, timing how long it took to perform a list of tasks in each car. These included turning on the seat heater, increasing the cabin temperature, turning on the defroster, adjusting the radio, resetting the trip computer, turning off the screen, and dimming the instruments. The old Volvo was the clear winner. "The four tasks is handled within ten seconds flat, during which the car is driven 306 meters at 110 km/h [1,004 feet at 68 mph]," VB found. Most of the other cars required twice as long, or more, to complete the same tasks. VB says that "one important aspect of this test is that the drivers had time to get to know the cars and their infotainment systems before the test started." VB lays the blame for the shift from buttons to screens with designers who "want a 'clean' interior with minimal switchgear."
Even with touchscreens, though, we can see in the spread of scores VB gave to different all-touch cars that design matters. You'll find almost no buttons in a Tesla Model 3, and we called out the lack of buttons in the Subaru Outback in our review, but both performed quite well in VB's tests. And VW's use of capacitive touch (versus physical) for the controls on the center stack appears to be exactly the wrong decision in terms of usability, with the ID.3 right at the bottom of the pack in VB's scores. I'm not surprised that the BMW iX scored well; although it has a touchscreen, you're not obligated to use it. BMW's rotary iDrive controller falls naturally to hand, and there are permanent controls arrayed around it under a sliver of wood that both looks and feels interesting. It's an early implementation of what the company calls shy tech, and it's a design trend I am very much looking forward to seeing evolve in the future.
Even with touchscreens, though, we can see in the spread of scores VB gave to different all-touch cars that design matters. You'll find almost no buttons in a Tesla Model 3, and we called out the lack of buttons in the Subaru Outback in our review, but both performed quite well in VB's tests. And VW's use of capacitive touch (versus physical) for the controls on the center stack appears to be exactly the wrong decision in terms of usability, with the ID.3 right at the bottom of the pack in VB's scores. I'm not surprised that the BMW iX scored well; although it has a touchscreen, you're not obligated to use it. BMW's rotary iDrive controller falls naturally to hand, and there are permanent controls arrayed around it under a sliver of wood that both looks and feels interesting. It's an early implementation of what the company calls shy tech, and it's a design trend I am very much looking forward to seeing evolve in the future.
Buttons are simply more "touch-friendly" (Score:5, Insightful)
Until they can make a touchscreen where I can feel where the buttons are, physical buttons will reign supreme. Anything that requires me to take my eyes off the road to use is simply and plainly useless garbage in a car environment.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
sudo mount
Re: Buttons are simply more "touch-friendly" (Score:3)
echo "1" >/proc/HVAC/heater
echo "0" >/proc/HVAC/heater
Re: Buttons are simply more "touch-friendly" (Score:5, Funny)
LD A,$35 ;Selects the heater/Aircon register ;Sets the heater off (bit 0), the aircon (bit 2). Bit 7 must be always 1 ;Every car interaction must return or it crashes
OUT ($40),A
LD A,$82
OUT ($41),A
RET
Re: (Score:3)
#!/bin/bash
# You must run this script in BASH or similar. It is not Bourne-shell compliant.
VALUE=$(sysctl com.carcompany.airconditioner)
VALUE=$(($VALUE & ~$HEATERFLAG))
VALUE=$(($VALUE | $AIRCONDITIONERFLAG))
sysctl -w com.carcompany.airconditioner=$VALUE
Re: (Score:2)
LD A,$35 ;Selects the heater/Aircon register ;Sets the heater off (bit 0), the aircon (bit 2). Bit 7 must be always 1 ;Every car interaction must return or it crashes
OUT ($40),A
LD A,$82
OUT ($41),A
RET
I was waiting for someone to take it to assembly. You sir/madam win the internet today. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Confucius says:
Program crashing, bad.
Car crashing, worse.
Re: (Score:3)
Haptic feedback in current form is useless. One still can't feel the button BEFORE pressing.
Touchable buttons are not essential if they can keep their positions constant. But those designers just like to move things everywhere all the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, my car has round temperature dials with touchscreen display embedded into dial. This works great - not only I can operate by touch by using dial, but they also display context-specific (e.g., hvac temp, seat heating or cooling setting) relevant information.
Re:Buttons are simply more "touch-friendly" (Score:5, Informative)
I can. Take a look at Tesla's touch controls. On their yoke.
They aren't touch screens, they are touch buttons embedded in the wheel. Except it's not a wheel, it's an aircraft style flight yoke. The buttons light up when you press them, which is handy because that's the exact moment you have them covered with your finger. Being on the wheel, sorry yoke, they are very easy to brush against accidentally. When trying to deliberately activate them it's easy to press the wrong one by accident, and you have to look at them to see where they are because the surface they are under is completely smooth.
Combine that with a yoke you can't grab at arbitrary angles, so again you need to look, and touch screen controls to select forward and reverse gear, so you have to look.
Re: (Score:2)
I like my new car, but I don't like the touchscreen. It's fine for display but otherwise it's annoying. There's a lot of things controllable from the steering wheel, but those times when I can't control it that way is annoying. I've learned to put my thumb on the corner to steady my finger, otherwise even in a smooth ride my finger will move just enough to screw up. I can push a button for automatic A/C, but it goes on full blast, then I can use something on the steering wheel, with a lot of presses to
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
With a touchscreen I'm a danger to anyone else on the road as I take my eyes and concentration off driving while I beep-boop my way through five levels of menu to adjust the setting I want.
Try getting a car with autopilot.
Re: (Score:2)
So you can sue the manufacturer after the crash?
Re: (Score:2)
Would haptics work?
Re: (Score:2)
Anything that requires me to take my eyes off the road to use is simply and plainly useless garbage in a car environment.
Imagine if there was a car that could drive itself for a little while while you do it.
Re: (Score:2)
But I grant him this, when there's something on the road that requires my attention and immediate reaction, fiddling with the AC is probably not way up on the to-do list.
Re: (Score:2)
The problems are not during normal use cases but when there is inclement weather or dangerous conditions things need to be quick and easy.
The humans with manual controls haven't shown themselves to be very capable in those situations.
Why exactly would you need to be fiddling with the aircon or radio in those situations anyway?
Re:Buttons are simply more "touch-friendly" (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
And here I am without mod points to give... this, exactly this. If I drive into an area with torrential downpour, I need to turn on the headlights, fog lights, hazards and wipers. If my car doesn't do that for me, why do I have to go through a bunch of menus to do it when I need to have my attention on the road?
Re: (Score:2)
Because I'm getting hot...or I need to turn on defroster...or I hate the song that just came on.
Shag carpet of 2020s (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
whatever sells cars is the right thing to do
Re: (Score:2)
>whatever sells cars is the right thing to do
Well, the ridiculous iPad bolted to the dashboard certainly didn't sell me a Tesla when I had to get a new car recently. I otherwise like the technology and the range, but the horrible controls took all Tesla models out of the race. I ended up with an electric car from a more traditional car maker, and find myself very happy with the choice.
I mean, the car UI has been refined and improved over more than 100 years - by now it's pretty well known what works and
Re: (Score:2)
This also means it's relatively easy to switch between cars, even made by different companies.
I rent a lot of cars and there's plenty of cars that get it horribly wrong. Volkswagen springs to mind for just having everything in the wrong place.
The fact that Tesla designers have decided to ignore all this huge trove of learning and experience and come up with the horrible Tesla design is an amazing example of hubris.
I'm not keen on all the kiddie-script toys they add (who are they trying to impress, 10-year olds?) but Tesla's plan is that the car will drive itself while you get the settings just right.
Big screens are a huge win for things like navigation. You do get something in return.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with you that these infotainment and electronic dashboards are terrible. But gadgets sell, maybe not to you and me, but I've worked on some of the gadgets with partner companies and watched those models become their top sellers. Flashy tech really does influence a lot of car buyers.
I'm at the other end. I'm looking at the few remaining truck models that offer bench seats because being able to take a nap in my truck is more of a value-add than animated themed speedometer or a radio that I have to car
Re: Shag carpet of 2020s (Score:3)
Itâ(TM)s about price per unit, nothing more. Touch screens are cheap, wiring a dash for buttons and twist dials is expensive.
Can't SaaS buttons (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to mention it makes is far harder for the car manufacturer to charge you rent on your car's features if they are mechanical knobs and buttons
Re: (Score:3)
> Not to mention it makes is far harder for the car manufacturer to charge you rent on your car's features if they are mechanical knobs and buttons
Right. And OnlyFansAuto will be along soon as an OTT app so people can stream driving with their boobs hanging out and GM can take 30%.
Nobody ever said the touchscreens were to benefit the driver.
Re: (Score:3)
We've been doing this in industrial applications, bringing buttons back to PLCs, for many years.
Re: (Score:3)
Voice command? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Mine has that but I've rarely used it. You need to practice on it before it's needed, otherwise it won't work how you expect it. I tried it once when I missed a turnoff, since I could turn it on from the steering wheel. But the navigation was backwards, I couldn't just give a normal address but had to work backwards. "South Virginia... Pittsville... Main Street... 123... ".
Re: (Score:2)
I'd give the current version of voice command 6 out of 10. It is not great for nav if you are trying to set up multiple waypoints, and it needs more authority over the climate control, at the moment it just allows you to set the temp.
But changing radio stations, and finding one-off addresses work well.
Re:Voice command? (Score:5, Insightful)
Voice controls in cars are terrible. The system has to deal with the ambient road noise of a moving vehicle, other passengers in the car (filtering out other voices is really tricky because the other voices are in the same frequency spectrum as the voice the car DOES want to listen to) and even more audio interference from the car's own stereo.
Sure, the problem could be solved, with a big enough microphone array and enough DSP. Maybe it would need an always-on data connection to train the car to your speech. Yeah, more data spewed out by the car, to be made obsolete like OnStar when the next generation of cellphone data protocol comes out. Maybe it should listen to your conversation, so the manufacturer can sell advertising. In the Bible Belt it could make sure you're not talking about driving to an abortion clinic!
Then it would have to work with different languages (car models are global now) and different accents. (I already have to put on an "american" accent when navigating certain voice menus on the phone. This is not what I want to do while trying to concentrate on driving)
What about vocabulary? "Windscreen" or "windshield?" "Footpath" or "sidewalk?" "Turn signal" or "blinker?" "Handbrake" or "emergency brake" "Gas" or "petrol?"
Let's say you solve all the problems above... What happens when your friend borrows the car and they have to train it from scratch?
No thank you. Give me proper buttons, knobs and switches, clearly labelled with industry-standard pictogram symbols. Simple.
No shit (Score:5, Informative)
Who would have thought that an easy to feel button which can be accessed without looking would be more user friendly than some random location on a flat screen where the person has to hope they hit the right spot when not looking?
The mind wobbles.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you ever stopped to imagine how many buttons you'd need for all the functions of a modern car?
What else do you get in return? Oh, yes, a massively good navigation screen instead of trying to find a place to prop your phone. 360 degree view of the car while you're parking it. etc., etc.
Re:No shit (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's why you have both, touchscreen and buttons/knobs for the most common controls.
From the fine summary,
Re: (Score:2)
A good example is the crutchfield.com site, which is well known for being good at identifying what aftermarket audio fits what vehicle. One of the questions their wizard will ask in the
Re:No shit (Score:5, Insightful)
I've spent the last 15+ years working on electronics and displays in tractors. That's a much more rough riding environment than cars or aircraft. If you're bouncing around you'd prefer to put your finger on a button and then press it when the time is right. You can't do that with a touch screen. Instead, you bounce around, hitting the wrong spot on the screen and activating something other than what was intended.
It all went to shit when iPhones and iPads with no physical buttons came out, The marketing clowns thought that meant that every control device had to have no buttons
Without looking.... (Score:2)
I can change the HVAC, turn up or change the station on the radio. Try that with a touch screen.
Yeah (Score:2)
I could've just said "Duh!" and this would've been the exact same answer. But statisticians need their fund money for "research".
Re:Yeah (Score:5, Insightful)
Wutt?!?? Who in heavens almighty name ... (Score:5, Insightful)
... needs "Data" for this sort of insight? A physical button or switch you can touch is *obviously* going to be more userfriendly than a slate of glass, in any situation where you have to keep your eyes on where you're going and not what you're fumbling for on the dashboard. This is basic common sense. What's next? Water is wet and Pope is Catholic proven in new academic studies?
Holy crap. I want my 5 minutes back.
Re: (Score:2)
> ... needs "Data" for this sort of insight?
Data? They got funding. Who said anything about needing data? They needed money.
Re:Wutt?!?? Who in heavens almighty name ... (Score:5, Insightful)
... needs "Data" for this sort of insight? A physical button or switch you can touch is *obviously* going to be more userfriendly than a slate of glass... This is basic common sense.
Don't think of it as "Data" - think of it as proof of unfitness for the designers who come up with this shit. You know, the ones who in an SF series would live on Golgafrinchan Ark Ship B, and who wouldn't recognize Common Sense if it came along and introduced itself to them by name.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wutt?!?? Who in heavens almighty name ... (Score:5, Insightful)
There are many "common sense" ideas that have been proven wrong, or have no basis in science (data). https://www.iflscience.com/sev... [iflscience.com]
Science teaches us to question everything. What we always thought was true, might not be.
In this case, the data backed up common sense. But that isn't always how it works out.
Re: (Score:2)
It's always useful to prove what you already know to be true, for two reasons that come immediately to mind: a) there's always someone who doubts the obvious, and b) maybe one time in a thousand you'll be surprised and find out that what everybody knew to be right actually isn't.
A huge disincentive for buying an electric car (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Try Skoda Eniaq. Modern tech, same as with VW ID.3/ID.4, but all the physical buttons are still there.
I also hate the iPads bolted onto dashboard.
Cameras went through this 10-15 years ago (Score:2)
late-90's early 2000's -- digital cameras are a nightmare of nested menus, and buttons to navigate.
Mid 2000's -- digital cameras sprouted shutter dials on top and aperture rings on the lens. Whoa what a concept, right where the hands expect them to be.
Still pain to set the date, time, etc. But having the shutter and apertures where they've been since the 50's.. yes, that's good.
I skipped the button cars. Everything I've had is buttons and knobs, and in the case of my mini, it's mostly toggles. TOGGLES!
Traffic offences (Score:5, Interesting)
UK recently introduced a new traffic law which prohibits you from even touching your phone when you're driving, even if it's in navigation mode. You've got to set up the route before you set off and leave it at that until you're parked again and the engine is off. You are also not allowed to interact with your phone even if you're stationary in traffic.
For me, it's common sense and I'm expecting more countries to follow suit very soon.
This brings me to my point. Cars with touchstreen-only or even touchscreen-mostly interfaces are technically not that much different from mobile phones. It's the same (if not greater, trying to navigate all the complex menus) level of distraction, and one could argue that in the light of this new law interacting with cars via a touchscreen interface may also be technically illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
Fiddling with [device that requires you take your eyes off the road] while in motion is a no brainer. But... ... do you have some possible scenario, where "fiddling with your phone while stationary in traffic" creates or tangibly increases any risk to you or others?
If you are stationary in traffic, any thought that you "could react to
Re: (Score:2)
I guess the problem is that if it were allowed, people would take out their phone while rolling to a stop at the traffic light. While technically they're already breaking the rule here it would be very difficult to prove and they'd always say they only got it out once the vehicle was stopped.
Re: (Score:2)
do you have some possible scenario, where "fiddling with your phone while stationary in traffic" creates or tangibly increases any risk to you or others?
True story, stopped at a light in the right lane, the guy next to me was fiddling with his phone, the left turn light turned green, the guy in the left turn lane (next over) started moving and the idiot besides me started going through the intersection, causing the oncoming left turning driver to make an emergency stop. Close to an accident because the guy was fiddling with his phone while stationary in traffic, then started moving when the car besides him did.
Re: Traffic offences (Score:2)
Not sure about following suit - the UK was late to the party with that law compared to your European neighbors.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which only proves that you should not be allowed on the road. Luckily, all the junction traffic cameras are getting upgrades now and can spot people on their phones.
Comment removed (Score:3)
BMW has it right. (Score:2)
Their center console dial with satellite buttons doesn't require you eyes to go below dash level and screen at driving level provides visuals. Once your hands are acclimated to the console dial/buttons it's almost muscle memory to do complex operations without impacting safety.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course I pretty much trash-heaped the car magazines as a group when one gave their annual award to a rig with the biggest point in its favor being that it had the biggest touch screen of the contenders. Rather than the one that did the best job of being a car.
YMMV.
Re: (Score:2)
This.
When I bought my current car, I checked and test-drove at least two dozen models, including a Tesla. And the primary reason I didn't like the Tesla (and I would have loved to like it, I own Tesla stock and am a big fan of the company) is the touchscreen. I finally bought a BMW - again. Because I love how the car is designed with the driver in mind, and how I can control absolutely everything without taking my eyes off the road. I can even enter a navigation target without looking at the screen. (you ca
Tesla has voice commands for all of these buttons (Score:3, Informative)
They should have tested voice commands.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh right, because voice commands work so well in a noisy car environment! No, thank you.
Also, it takes a lot longer to say "Increase the fan speed" than to tap the button once. "I'm sorry, I didn't understand that."
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with Tesla touch is not just the obvious, having to take your eyes off the road to navigate menus, but the fact that in
Re: Tesla has voice commands for all of these butt (Score:2)
Why test a 4 year old model that only exists on a small fraction of cars?
Why not test current software and hardware?
Tesla Buttons (Score:5, Interesting)
If there is one accessory that Tesla could make and I would gladly purchase for my Model 3, is a thin bar of buttons to be mounted under the touchscreen.
Is not only that some functions are only available thru the touch screen, but at every major software release, the UI gets redesigned and stuff moves around from where it was before. F--- no, I need the control to open the glove box to be exactly where I remember it was when I have to open that glove box fast.
And no, pushing a button on the steering wheel and screaming "Open glove box" at the car is not a solution covering 100% of the use cases.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
When you enable Valet Mode (added as free OTA update in 2015), besides the speed/acceleration limits , the glove box and front trunk cannot be unlocked.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
AA (Score:2)
Really it is just duh (Score:3)
I guess we need data now (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Common sense is often wrong. https://www.iflscience.com/sev... [iflscience.com]
In this case, the data backed it up. But often, it doesn't.
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree with your point, half of the examples in that article are not common sense at all, but old wive's tales. Something that is common sense, you will be able to make a sensible argument as to why it's true, even if that argument is flawed.
Re: (Score:2)
The article could have been better, I agree. But the distinction between "old wives' tales" and "common sense" can be blurry. What makes logical sense to you, and what makes logical sense to me, might be very different. That's why science is based on testing hypotheses to determine if, in fact, they are true.
Poor measure. (Score:2)
Time to change the setting is not the best measure of distraction. It may take much longer to use a voice command, but distraction is far less.
Re: (Score:2)
I actually started using the voice control in my car because trying even touching quickly the right spot on a touch screen is too hit and miss when the car is in actual motion on real world roads. Yea I shouldn't be trying to use the screen while driving, the problem is that it is there just begging to be used. At least all the controls they tested are still normal
What, really? (Score:4, Insightful)
Buttons vs touchscreens? I can't believe this is even a question.
Manufacturers hate moving parts and will do anything they can do to get rid of them, even something simple as a button or switch. So yes, they'll ruin the customer experience of anything,including a car, as long as they can reduce the part count.
And that's exactly why they do this. It's not about customer experience, it's about saving 39 cents and avoiding the unlikely chance of a switch failing, thereby "ruining the customer experience". Plus, it's shiny.
Touchscreens suck for vehicular controls unless your driving a John Deere combine or whatever. For a passenger vehicle? Pure shit.
Re:What, really? (Score:4)
Buttons vs touchscreens? I can't believe this is even a question.
Manufacturers hate moving parts and will do anything they can do to get rid of them, even something simple as a button or switch. So yes, they'll ruin the customer experience of anything,including a car, as long as they can reduce the part count.
And that's exactly why they do this. It's not about customer experience, it's about saving 39 cents and avoiding the unlikely chance of a switch failing, thereby "ruining the customer experience". Plus, it's shiny.
Touchscreens suck for vehicular controls unless your driving a John Deere combine or whatever. For a passenger vehicle? Pure shit.
I'd mod you up but I've already posted on here. Touchscreens also have the advantage (to the manufacturer, not to you) that when they do fail, a whole load of features get crippled at all at once. Audio, HVAC, navigation, seats, mirrors... So you go to replace the touchscreen module - even if the obsolete touchscreen is still available, it will cost way more than a simple switch. Oh well, the car is a few years old, maybe the dealer will give you a trade-in on a new car.
It would do massive harm to the used-car market, which of course would be a boon to the car manufacturers - they would be thrilled if we had to buy a new car as often as we buy new phones.
When do we get the first touch screen steering? (Score:3)
Also: gloves. I am surprised that safety equipment and basic controls are not required to function even when the driver has a pair of thick insulated gloves. Haptic buttons are the worst of both worlds, just trying to find the button you have now accidentally pressed it or the one next to it. Does haptic even work through gloves?
apples to apples (Score:2)
Touch screens aren't used for YOUR benefit (Score:4, Insightful)
They benefit the manufacturer. With a touch screen, they can use a stock physical device and design the user interface later, or change it over time, or charge subscriptions to enable "premium" features.
More knobs, too. (Score:2)
Keep using knobs for volume and temperature controls. The little push up/down toggle-style buttons on the steering wheel are terrible for volume control.
Don't love it, just accept it (Score:2)
I'm a recently new Model 3 owner. Overall, no regrets, but not in love with everything on the screen. Ride is pretty stiff so trying to look and push the screen is hit and miss.
Voice recognition is so-so but sometimes I summon a thermostat request that doesn't compute. I'm still getting used to it. Great car, but that part is a bit frustrating.
My former 2006 Honda CRV which I put over 200k on was simple. 3 big dials: fan speed, temp and venting. A button to turn on AC. That's it. Dials were big and notched.
Add this to the "No Shit" list (Score:5, Insightful)
I still can't believe that touchscreens for basic functions in place of physical buttons EVER was okayed by anybody. I'm loving my new Ford Mach E, but I hate, hate, hate that all of the A/C and fan functions are at the bottom of my big-ass touchscreen.
Right now, I have to hit the 'fan' button, wait for the slider +/- thing to pop up, then touch the + or - button the correct number of times WITHOUT hitting anywhere else on the screen, lest the slider disappear. Did I mention that they are at the BOTTOM of the screen, so I really have to look down and take my eyes off the road to do this. How this even got past the testing stage is beyond me. I'd happily pay $1,000 to rip out the oversized iPad and put back in the control panel/screen from my old 2016 Kia Optima.
Oh, and buttons to pop the door open in place of door handles? Just stupid and unnecessary.
Wrong test (Score:2)
The right test is to measure how long it takes to do all these tasks while requiring the driver to keep his eyes on the road. My guess is that the time difference is far greater than the less useful task allowing eyes to wander to the touchscreen.
Another useful test is the safety test. Sort of like the driver distraction tests with cell phones, but instead asking the driver to perform the indicated tasks with buttons or touchscreen while a safety critical event happens around the car.
This is common sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Looking to see it "evolve". (Score:2)
That's a novel way of saying "die horribly in a massive oxygen explosion".
When it comes to automotive UI... (Score:5, Insightful)
Less Apple, more Fisher-Price, please.
What happens when touchscreen doesn't work ? (Score:3)
UX/UI Design (Score:2)
stupidity incarnate (Score:3)
It doesn't take a genius to realize that controls that you can feel are better than ones that you have to look at a screen to operate.
The right combo of buttons *and* knobs (Score:3)
- 2003 Infiniti G35 had so many damn buttons for HVAC / Infotainment that it seemed like I was controlling a space shuttle. Usability - poor
- 2014 Honda Odyssey had touchscreen for infotainment functions and several buttons + 2 knobs for hvac system. Implementation and usability - poor
- 2017 Ford F150 'stx' trim level has touchscreen for infotainment and has 2 knobs + minimal buttons for hvac. Implementation and usability - fair to good
- 2003 Honda CRV (iirc) has 3 knobs + button for HVAC and an old-school AM/FM/Cassette stereo. Implementation and usability - excellent
The big winners are HVAC systems which use giant knobs to change "states" of the system. The CRV's first knob clearly indicates whether the blower will be hitting feet, feet+windshield, windshield, or center dash vents. The second knob sets fan speed, and the third knob provides an analog adjustment of cold-->hot. One knob as a single, large button to indicate whether air is recirculated or drawn from outside, and another knob has a single, large button to indicate whether AC is turned on. It takes about 2 seconds to figure out what you're getting. Wish all cars were managed like this.
They don't need data. (Score:3)
I and millions of other people have been saying that touchscreens are clumsy and dangerous because you need to take your eyes off the road to use them because there is no tactile feel.
With buttons, when you're driving you can't glance down for a second to look exactly where the AC button is, then feel for it as you keep your eyes on the road...."Top left button...there it is!" You can't do that with a touchscreen. It's a flat piece of glass that is impossible to know where you are tapping or what you are tapping on without looking at it.
Touchscreens in cars need to provide some kind of feedback other than verbal as to what or where you are pressing.
Re: (Score:3)
Good for you Mr perfect driver. I hope for your sake that all the other drivers around you are always just as skilled and car knowledgeable as yourself. But that is not reality.
The debate is for what is safe for the common driver. Remember the common driver shares the road with you.