BMW Blames Young People For Loss of Real Buttons In New Cars (caranddriver.com) 150
BMW is about to release their most screen-dependent vehicles ever, reports Car and Driver:
Step into the BMW iX3, and you'll notice something is missing: real buttons. The climate controls are fettered to the center screen, as is nearly every other feature, save for a handful located in the center console — at least the window switches are still on the doors...
But don't blame a desire for larger profit margins; BMW's move away from physical switchgear and toward touchscreen dependence is the fault of younger buyers, according to one executive. In an interview with CarExpert, Vikram Pawah, the CEO of BMW Group Australia, said that young buyers prefer the newer controls... According to the executive, younger customers are less patient with their technology. "They want things done quickly, and they're multitasking," Pawah said. "And we have to keep that in mind. That's how customers are evolving. They are multitasking...."
Tesla has always forced functions to its center screen; newer players such as Rivian do the same. And in recent years, established brands like Mazda and Mercedes-Benz have moved more and more functions to touchscreens.
BMW's iX3 also includes a new safety feature — a side-radar that detects if a cyclist or vehicle is approaching, and delays the release of the electronic door lock "until the danger passes."
Tesla has always forced functions to its center screen; newer players such as Rivian do the same. And in recent years, established brands like Mazda and Mercedes-Benz have moved more and more functions to touchscreens.
BMW's iX3 also includes a new safety feature — a side-radar that detects if a cyclist or vehicle is approaching, and delays the release of the electronic door lock "until the danger passes."
Still on the doors? (Score:4, Informative)
At least the E36 M3 coupe has the window controls on the center console. And maybe because the windows have no frames, the doors contain electric motors that unseal the windows when one opens a door and seal them when one closes a door. This is a bit of a problem when one of these motors fails or when the battery is dead or disconnected. Consumers have known for a long time that too much technology in a car is a bad thing. We can't blame everything solely on the younger generations.
Re:Still on the doors? (Score:5, Interesting)
Consumers have known for a long time that too much technology in a car is a bad thing.
Apparently not. Otherwise, consumers would not buy all those additional features. Some people calling themselves car guys have claimed for a long time that too much technology in a car is a bad thing. But that's not what consumer demand tells the car companies. And if you look at statistics, car break downs per mile driven are in a constant decline. A 1970ies car at 100,000 miles was ridden down. A 2020ies car at 100,000 miles is just well driven in. Yes, people could fix the 1970ies car themselves. Just buy the manual and the spare part, and off you go. But that was a necessity, not a feature. Today, people want their Apple Carplay and their Android Auto. And that means you need a computer as your head unit. People want cruise control and good mileage, and that means electronic injection. Lambda catalysts have reduced car emissions, and unleaded fuel has severally brought down violent crime numbers 20 years later. This also required electronic injection. People don't want to crank down their windows, and that means electric window controls. People like their stability control, so the car does not go off the road uncontrolled if you make a steering mistake. People like anti lock brakes. Airbags and pretensioners have brought down road fatalities from their heights in the 1970ies.
Yes, you now need to be a learned car specialist to service a car. But you need service far less often, and your car is a better car in all other aspects.
Re:Still on the doors? (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is HOW the technology is implemented, and if it can lead to fatalities from the "safety feature" being disabled through bad engineering.
The choice to implement electronic door handles is a wholly ignorant one.
Electronic windows have been around for 30 years. Window punches have been around for at least 10.
There is no answer for electronic doors.
All that being said, there was an article when car companies were utilizing tablet UI based interfaces to control things vs physical. One of the reasons was savings on having to wire and install manual switches/interfaces. So this article, and BMW, are full of shit.
Especially when you consider they forced advertisements on their expensive ass cars.
At the end of the day, their reasoning is money, not "young people".
Using "young people" as an excuse and scapegoat has been a standard catch all for "we are cheap, so blame young people"
Re:Still on the doors? (Score:4, Interesting)
There is a simple answer to this. Don't buy their cars.
I owned three BMWs (two 3-series and a 5-series). Will not buy one again, even though I loved the feel of a BMW on the road. They really are The Ultimate Driving Machine.
But my local BMW service center absolutely sucks and was often disrespectful to my spouse. And (more recently) they have put subscriptions on features that I would expect would be included in the cost. And let's not get into episode of advertisements playing.
So no more BMW for me. And I am fully in the demographic they want: Mid 50s male, significant disposable income, homeowner in the suburbs.
The kids are okay? (Score:2)
Interesting FP branch but it doesn't seem to be going into my interests and it definitely hasn't (so far) seemed relevant to the focus of the actual story. But the story is actually related to a fresh axe I'm trying to whet. Some kind of joke about young people taking over and old people worth remembering?
So my premise is that the kids are going to be different from us. No surprise there, at least not if you've been paying attention. How long? Or I guess all of recorded history might be long enough. I do th
Re:Still on the doors? (Score:5, Interesting)
Cars last longer because of engineering competition to drive quality in vehicle design and assembly.
The ODB2 standard congealed a lot of emissions hassle, and ultimately forced prolonging service life in many product lines.
Although many shade tree mechanics of an older era are gone, there are many new ones that mod their cars, or simply repair them without the need of expensive dealer service costs; this is also part of the Right To Repair movement, where secret sauces hidden in the CANBUS. connected, multi-system firmware present in most cars.
Hackers have figured out what's what for many models.
And while convenience features are nice, any engineer will tell you that more features means more things that can go wrong. Owning some vehicles is like death-by-a-thousand-cuts as desired features slowly decay. Common parts become rarer and rarer.
The no-button approach also means a single point of failure-- the all-important console.Features become combines, all in a race to the bottom.
Increasing compliance costs and the need for profitability push car makers to make unwise choices. Button-based vehicles required ten seconds of familiarity to drive safely. Console-based devices require far more, and also cause visual distractions instead of intuitive look-and-feel controls.
It's just not as simple as you describe. Worse, international-market focused vehicle makers, especially the Europeans, make a center console because they must adapt to a left of right side steering basis-- it's cheaper just to build holes in the chassis and move the steering column left or right, thus not having two different dashboards and assemblies.
Consumers will choose among the offerings that suit them. The auto industry used to use specs to drive vehicle sales. Now, the motives and marketing are lifestyle-appeals.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently not. Otherwise, consumers would not buy all those additional features.
Consumers have no choice.
If they want a BMW i3X// and that thing only comes with "no buttons" - how the fark would they be able to get one with buttons?
Oh, they should not buy the BMW i3X// but rather an Austin Martin.
Sure ... good idea. Which part of: they want an BMW i3X// did escape you?
Re: (Score:2)
People often buy by selecting for certain features, and you get stuck with some features you don't like because the perfect choice is not available.
And then clueless exec's claim that the feature that they got stuck with must be valued because they bought it (simply because they had no choice to get some other feature they though was important). This is especially true when features are bundled into large packages and/or you simply cannot pick less (or even different) electronics with a given package that
Re: (Score:2)
And then clueless exec's claim that the feature that they got stuck with must be valued because they bought it (simply because they had no choice to get some other feature they though was important).
Tesla got rid of buttons and radar to save money. Of course, that's not good for marketing, so they turn that cheapness into a positive.
Seems like something similar here with BMW. A money saving decision is being spun into a positive. Do young people really want center screen controls instead of buttons?
It's now common for executives and politicians nowadays to spew falsehoods that are said repeatedly and loudly enough until it's accepted as truth.
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla got rid of radar because it didn't work/wasn't good enough to do what it was supposed to do, and added nothing.
Getting rid of the buttons has been a part of the Tesla aesthetic: sleek, minimalist/futurist feel. Yes, that was likely done to cut costs, judging by how cheap the vehicles feel in general and how poorly they're put together.
How New, Got Way Worse. (Score:2)
Consumers have known for a long time that too much technology in a car is a bad thing.
Apparently not. Otherwise, consumers would not buy all those additional features. Some people calling themselves car guys have claimed for a long time that too much technology in a car is a bad thing. But that's not what consumer demand tells the car companies.
The image of your definition of "demand" feels an awfully lot like the consumer arm being twisted behind a back and into a wallet to make sure that they get *every* feature they never asked for, as you assume all those consumers asked for the average car price to be raised by $20,000 in the last decade.
I bought my first car with roll-down windows, no A/C, an AM/FM radio, and a manual transmission. Not in the 1970s. In the era where all of those were available upgrades. Did my own maintenance and never ha
Re: (Score:2)
Catalysts were added to address smog. Leaded gas poisons catalysts; that's why the lead was removed. Yes, society benefited tremendously by this, but we need to remember: unleaded gas was driven entirely by smog regulations.
As smog requirements got more stringent, fuel injection replaced carburetors because FI controlled the mixture more accurately, making the catalysts more effective. FI also slightly improved mileage.
I don't think there's any connection between fuel inje
Re: (Score:2)
People are dumb. Especially about their cars.
My guess is that people don't demand those features because they're an improvement. They demand them because it's some sort of a flex, which is the main reason people buy the BMW badge.
It could be a competition, being able to say "my BMW does this, your Merc doesn't".
And I wonder how people demand these things. Via questionnaires from people who probably aren't in position to buy them in the first place? Sort of a capricious "wish list" that had no real subst
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, you need the windows to do that to get a good seal when the doors are frameless. It is not strictly necessary, but it reduces wind noise.
People only think there's something special about BMW or Mercedes because they have not worked on cars. Once you have worked on a couple dozen different vehicles and gotten to know how they are put together you realize there is nothing at all special about modern BMWs or Mercedes compared to other modern cars. After the Lexus LS ate their luxury car lunch they all hav
Re: (Score:3)
The only real reason I see them do this is that frameless windows that are not locked under some form of sill are very easy to pry out to break into with a coat hanger.
Re: Still on the doors? (Score:2)
Re: Still on the doors? (Score:2)
What happens if you slam the door? Cause all the electrics to go haywire?
Re: Still on the doors? (Score:3)
And maybe because the windows have no frames, the doors contain electric motors that unseal the windows when one opens a door and seal them when one closes a door. This is a bit of a problem when one of these motors fails or when the battery is dead or disconnected.
I thought _every_ convertible did that, because the windows seal with the roof of the car. An old Ford Mustang is definitely not high tech.
I've driven one on a dead alternator and dying battery, you just push the door open, the glass is pressed into a soft rubber seal and pops out a little less than gracefully. Obviously the dead battery and alternator are the bigger concern because you're not going anywhere.
Who complains about window motors on a convertible ffs?
Re: (Score:3)
Consumers have known for a long time that too much technology in a car is a bad thing.
Errr no. Consumers are a collective are incredibly dumb. A small subset of consumers may "know" that but even then, I disagree with your statement (while I agree with what you're trying to say). Too much technology is not a bad thing. The *WRONG* kind of technology for the wrong purpose is a bad thing.
Bullshit! (Score:5, Funny)
Real switches and buttons cost money and can by-pass subscription. Touch controls, on the other hand, can be controlled by the mothership.
Want to turn up the volume? That's $5 per month.
At least BMW could have done away with the turn signal stick, no real BMW driver uses it.
Re: Bullshit! (Score:2)
For a cheap brand, I get that they want to shave off something from the price. For BMW? Nope.
Re: (Score:2)
Or vice versa. I wouldn't trade my 2009 MiniCooper S with any beamer.even if they pay me. Slick, compact, perfect for the city, stays on the road, great acceleration.
Re:Bullshit! (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
You think physical volume buttons are physical controls? They are also just giving a signal if you dial left or right.
Re: (Score:2)
This still has important implications. For example your volume dial has no left/right limits anymore, but at the same time the dialing being translated into digital signals means that a legislation that requires a certain maximum volume (there were such laws in some countries) can make sure to enforce that limit in software with an update. A real physical dial would not have allowed for that. And that's not about opting into hearing damage, but if you for example use other headphones they may be less loud a
Re:Bullshit! (Score:4, Informative)
Like heated seats in BMW?
Re: (Score:2)
If you sit for sometime, they become warm anyways. If you eat and sit, then it can become extra warm in no time. No thanks. I can warm my own seats.
Bullshit detected (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Just putting all the controls on the screen, which you're going to have anyway, is cheaper than going around and adding extra buttons. But saying you're cheap sounds bad.
BMW is getting stranger and stranger. I found their vaunted "engineering" was a canard after buying one for my sone as a wedding present. Turned out their engineers think top notch engineering = overly complicated and fussy. A money pit as well. More like 1960's cars as far as longevity goes.
Then there's the seat heaters subscription concept, having you pay for something that is already there.
Now the cheapass thing of removing real switches and blaming it on young people? Lame.
Funny, I thought young
Re: (Score:3)
1) Regulatory requirements and fuel efficiency
2) Cost
3) The Chinese consumers.
The last one is a considerable factor.
Total BS (Score:5, Informative)
If people wanted to do things quickly, theyâ(TM)d want physical buttons that are always in the same place.
Sure a quick digital interface is better than a slow one, but it will never be more convenient or faster than physical switches or toggles.
I can adjust my AC temp, put it on full blast, toggle the defogger and put on my heated seat in under 2 seconds using physical, tactile buttons. In that time youâ(TM)ve barely turned your head toward the screen to have to look at. Because they will change the interface whenever they like using OTA updates.
Re: Total BS (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's what, it seems, is causing cars to explode into a fireball.
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There's no reason to not incorporate both.
The UI is easy - while the car is in motion (not stopped), the touch screen should be disabled. Any adjustments you need to make while moving needs to be done with buttons you can feel and navigate without looking.
So things like HVAC controls (fan speed, temperature, mode (AC/heat/defrost/etc)), radio (volume, forward/back depending on mode - e.g., radio seek forward/backwards, or track skip/repeat), seat heat/cooling, and seat adjustments all may need to done whils
Re: (Score:2)
There's no reason to not incorporate both.
Jeep already does. And it works pretty nicely. Different people have different approaches. BMW is drunk.
Re: (Score:2)
The same is true for virtually all features that don't directly affect the operation of the engine itself (and even most of those!). Even when we're talking about something like power windows or HVAC, the buttons don't need to do anything more than physically bridge the d
Re: (Score:2)
> But things like setting your destination on the navigation, setting up your music playlist, etc. only need to be done while the car is stopped and thus can remain touchscreen only interface.
Seriously? The person sitting next to you in the car is perfectly able to do all these things while you are driving.
Re: (Score:3)
If people wanted to do things quickly, theyâ(TM)d want physical buttons that are always in the same place. Sure a quick digital interface is better than a slow one, but it will never be more convenient or faster than physical switches or toggles. I can adjust my AC temp, put it on full blast, toggle the defogger and put on my heated seat in under 2 seconds using physical, tactile buttons. In that time youâ(TM)ve barely turned your head toward the screen to have to look at. Because they will change the interface whenever they like using OTA updates.
It's quite possible to have both mechanical switches and a touchscreen. In this day and age, having multiple ways to control the vehicle is pretty easy.
My vehicle has multiple ways to control many functions. Shows speed both in MPH and olde school needle, (standard or metric) and you can control those functions from the Steering wheel, the center panel, or the touchscreen. And it's the best of both worlds, there are some functions like customization that you need the touchscreen for. Those can't be adju
Re: (Score:2)
Came here to say this. With a physical switch, I don't have to back out of the radio screen to turn the blower fan up/down, etc. Everything via the screen != multitasking.
Of course the reason is profit margin (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It is so obvious, the reason is of course profit margin, simple as that.
The bean counter fallacy (not on your part - the bean counters)
Just assuming that nickel and dimming people will make for more profit, while altering the product that makes for less sales.
I've pissed them off when I asked what the profit is on no sales when they've saved too much money no one likes the product any more.
BMW wants spyware (Score:2)
They've got reversing cameras so they don't have to get out and look, they've got proximity alerts for when they turn into a wall/parked car, they've got a being-overtaken alert, they've got lane assistance for when they fiddle with the touch-screen, and they don't have a clutch demanding their attention. It's like there is nothing to do, of course they want to "multi-task". It's horrifying that a car-maker agrees with that lack of responsibility. I suspect it's more about moving the driver's "leisure" t
Re: (Score:3)
They've got reversing cameras so they don't have to get out and look
Is it your premise that is the reason for backup cameras? Is the situation the exact same after you get out to look then get back in the vehicle?
Can you back your car up on a skinny dirt road on the face of a cliff with complete assurance? I know 2 people who have killed a child while backing up. Children don't stay in one place like statues. They wish they had cameras in the back.
Now back to the other uses. I've backed up a mile or more on some skinny mountain roads to accommodate others. This is not e
Re: (Score:2)
Those are some weird edge cases you're pulling out.
And speaking of stats about fewer children dying, I'm sure you know that despite all the added tech and safety, there are more crashes every year.
Is your opinion that all the tech isn't making people lazy? You cite the backup cameras, but I'd bet you the reason those people might stop for a kid in their path was not because they were intently looking at the camera, but because the car beeped a loud alarm at them.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're trusting the edge of that cliff to actually be right at the red line on your camera, you're going over anyway.
Tell me you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about with Cameras, without saying you have no idea about cameras.
Allow me to elucidate. The camera is fixed. it shows you exactly where you are. And only a tool fool would run up against the redline. If you see teh drop when you aer at the red line, you are probably going over. There is green, there is yellow, and if you are on the red, you are red.
More to the point, it doesn't take a $6k computer with access to lock everything in your car behind a paywall just to get a video feed from the back of the car to somewhere on the dash. It takes a $20 camera and a $50 dumb display (and that would in most cases give a significantly higher quality image than the garbage auto manufacturers are using).
I see, how do you calibrate the lines? And homie, I have a second camera on teh back. Your claim i
Bmw can go fuck themselves (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Bmw can go fuck themselves (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The whole quality german engineering approach died years ago. These days german cars are built-to-a-price plastic crap. I too owned a recent BMW - a 3 series - got rid of it after 9 months. Awful interface, piss poor fuel economy and a driving position that became uncomfortable on long journeys. Plus once they get your money they don't want to know. I had a warranty repair and the service staff couldn't have been more indifferent and borderline rude. Will never get another.
Re: (Score:3)
The whole quality german engineering approach died years ago. These days german cars are built-to-a-price plastic crap. I too owned a recent BMW - a 3 series - got rid of it after 9 months. Awful interface, piss poor fuel economy and a driving position that became uncomfortable on long journeys. Plus once they get your money they don't want to know. I had a warranty repair and the service staff couldn't have been more indifferent and borderline rude. Will never get another.
Yup, I watched a video about a WW1 German U boat. I was very impressed by the quality and build of the diesel engines. From well over a century ago! But yes, the appear to have stalled out and regressed.
I've been very pleased with my Jeeps, the engine build quality is good, I put 200K+ with little issue other than standard maintenance. Only exception was I traded in my Renegade for a Trailhawk because of a good deal. But not for any mechanical issues.
Re: (Score:2)
I bought 2 BMW's The first and the last. Bought it for my son as a wedding present. worked okay for a bit, then turned into a money pit. Thing spent as much time in the garages being fixed as it did running.
Jaguar is the same. My friend constantly complained that it was in the garage and the repair cost was outrageous. He loved the "status" and the looks but hated everything else. He finally sold it and swore he would never buy another one. Since they apparently no longer make cars, that shouldn't be an issue now.
Modal interfaces (Score:2)
That statement is idiotic.
Touch screen interfaces tend to be modal dialogs: one dialog at a time.
If the controls instead are available all the time (in the physical world), then it becomes easier to multitask.
Re: (Score:2)
"Hi, BYD, turn off the air conditioning."
"Hi, BYD, volume down/up."
"Hi, BYD, next song."
Saw this on an Atto3, and it worked surprisingly well. Not perfect, but just about all the controls you might need to adjust while driving that are not on the wheel or stalks are covered. I also prefer physical controls that I can operate through muscle memory for everything, but voice control seems like a good move to address the obvious safety concern that moving to
Re: (Score:2)
Well, this old fart wants buttons -ordered ID.Polo (Score:4, Interesting)
In other news, VAG group (VW, Seat, Cupra, Skoda, Audi) seems to be going into completely different direction. I placed my order for ID.Polo the moment the orders opened back at the end of April.
And others seem to agree - the MEB Entry family (Cupra Raval / ID.Polo for hatchback and ID.Cross/Skoda Epiq) have already 80000+ orders in a few months - many for people who have not even been able to test drive the car.
Reviewers seem to agree, and when I look at the car I'm absolutely certain I'm going to enjoy it when I get it this October.
For example, here's one. Fast forward to 5:30 to see interior stuff (including the darn buttons!).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
The other car in the family, Cupra Raval was also an option for me, but since VAG decided that temperature controls in those would still be sliders (even if other stuff still has buttons), I went with Polo.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, this is kind of an outdated article and this is most certainly misleading: "And in recent years, established brands like Mazda and Mercedes-Benz have moved more and more functions to touchscreens."
In actual recent years, the backlash against touchscreens has caused "established brands" (including Mercedes) to move _back_ to physical buttons:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/j... [forbes.com]
The interview mainly shows a CEO out of touch with his consumers and reasoning based on shiny looking designs and his own 'vision'
Nobody is multitasking (Score:3)
That's an excuse for not paying attention. We've trained young people on touch screens. Obviously they prefer what they know. Like all young people ever they think the rules don't apply to them, so what is important to them, pixels on screens, takes precedence over actually DRIVING THE FUCKING CAR in traffic with OTHER PEOPLE, not NPCs.
Re: (Score:2)
Correct. When I am driving my attention should be looking at the car in front, not peering at a display trying to find the menu item to change air-con fan speed. These screens are dangerous, you think that you will find what you want with a quick glance and suddenly realise that you have had your eyes off the road for 10 seconds - which at 70mph is over 200 yards.
I guess that BMW is now struck off the list when I next look for a car to buy; along with Tesla and others which are just computer screens with a
"They want things done quickly" (Score:4, Interesting)
Seriously? So which is faster: pressing a physical switch, or navigating through X menus on a touchscreen?
It's not just touchscreens, though. Our EV has the climate control functions on touch-sensitive "switches". Not part of the display, but nearly as bad, because there is zero tactile feedback. They are just part of a smooth panel, so you still have to look down to find the one you want.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Brainless repetition of marketing mush. The suits associate tap-tapping on a screen with instant gratification, which is very saleable. But it's a little too brusque to put it like that, so it becomes "get things done quickly". This is a guy whose job is beating you over the head with what he wants you to buy, until you acquiesce. The fact that it makes you do things more slowly, and makes it harder to multitask, doesn't matter. He is BMW; you will buy.
I know in the smartphone space, people have completely
heebee jeebees (Score:2)
The last thing auto manufacturers should be doing is enabling "multitasking" while behind the wheel.
Mmmm, yes... (Score:2)
S. M. F. H.
We listen to kids now? (Score:3)
So, BMW... (Score:2)
Youngsters don't buy BMWs (Score:3)
unless Daddy bought it for them.
Re: (Score:2)
New safety feature? (Score:2)
> BMW's iX3 also includes a new safety feature — a side-radar that detects if a cyclist or vehicle is approaching, and delays the release of the electronic door lock "until the danger passes."
So if you park in a tight spot you're never getting out?
Ofc, bmw drivers aren't known for being able to park on tight spots... they need 2-3 spots for one car.
Multitasking... (Score:2)
It's official (Score:3)
BMW stands for Blame Minors Week
This is a BS cover story (Score:3)
The real reason is buttons cost money, car manufacturers know this. They also know that most people want buttons, with a dial or button you didn't have to even look at the screen. I'm not buying it and you shouldn't either
Excuse me? (Score:3)
"They want things done quickly, and they're multitasking,"
Then why are they using touchscreens? Want to turn on the radio? Press a button? Want higher or lower volume? Turn the knob. Want more a/c? Turn the dial. I'm not sure how things can get done more quickly than that using a touchscreen.
As for multitasking, what other tasks are they doing when they're supposed to be driving with their hands on the wheel and eyes on the road? Are they making omelets?
What young people want... (Score:2)
...Young buyers prefer the newer controls...
They also prefer affordable cars. Wonder when the industry's going to work on that problem?
Re: (Score:2)
The old German Auto industry is pretty much cooked, due to high arrogance, greed and stupidity. The Chinese competition is cheaper and at least as good. And that is with a long shipping path. And the Germans are currently trying to focus on the "premium" segment. Yep, that will fix things.
Re: (Score:2)
The newer controls are more affordable. In the case of the non-button "buttons" a chip and some megaohm resistors and a piece of plastic with some labels screen printed on it replace a whole bunch of custom-designed injection-molded buttons with special labels which have to be applied with sub-millimeter accuracy, and switches for them which have to be able to survive hundreds of thousands of cycles in an extreme temperature environment. Only in the most basic vehicles which still have manual climate contro
Re: (Score:2)
China has that problem solved. Unfortunately the protectionist and regressive policies of my government forbid me to purchase one.
Correction (Score:2)
This is a MBA/commercials guy who is making no sense on what he is explaining.
My correction below:
"Vikram Pawah, the CEO of BMW Group Australia, said that young buyers [CORRECTION : YOUNG BMW DESIGNERS] prefer the newer controls"
It's quicker to use buttons.
Interesting (Score:2)
People still buying beemers? Give it a few months...
Because multitasking while driving is a good idea (Score:2)
Seriously, why are these assholes endangering everybody? Everything for a buck and morality be damned?
multitasking (Score:2)
The problem with touchscreen dependence (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Depends highly on the control. I'd say a good 50% of cars on the road have button layouts that very much make people look down and check which button they are pressing as well. Mazda is one of the worst for this. I guess if you try really hard you could memorise the order and start counting your way along a strip of identical looking and feeling buttons. But the reality is everyone looks down at it.
Ideally we take all controls away. Push the voice button and tell the car what you want to do. That's the leas
Things done quickly you say? (Score:3)
Here's a good test for young people: install wifi light switches in your bathroom. Disable the physical part of the switch and only use your phone touch screen for a week to operate the lights when you need to enter the bathroom. Now figure out you just grew up to understand why push buttons are kind of important in a car.
Infuriating Liar! (Score:2)
This guy is an infuriating liar!
He contradicts himself:
younger customers are less patient with their technology. "They want things done quickly
OK. So how does replacing a physical switch that responds instantly with menu options three layers deep make anything faster?
In the end, the market will decide. Some car companies are reversing their virtual button mistakes, so buyers can choose brands with buttons or this virtual shit.
In BMW's case it doesn't matter to me as I dislike their overpriced PoS cars and wouldn't buy one anyway. But, this liar galls me.
Re: (Score:2)
Never begin a business relationship with a lie.
Sounds like they'll gaslight you at the warranty department too.
Young people buying BMW are probably less than 5% of the client base.
These guys sound worse than Jaguar now.
Seems like a terrible investment.
Removed bcuz younger buyers want things done quick (Score:2)
How can they say that with a straight face? Removed physical controls because young people want things done quicker?
It takes way longer to perform a task using touch controls and navigating menus, and things like that, versus a dedicate button. These marketing people are morons.
Re: (Score:3)
How can they say that with a straight face?
BMW marketing. They need to convince people that this is what they really want. And on top of that, it's "young people" that want it. So if you want buttons, you must be "old".
It's pretty easy to figure out that an additional touch screen control have zero recurring cost once the screen is there. That's what the accounting department has decreed. That's what you'll get.
Re: (Score:2)
Most touch screen UI used only let you do 1 task at a time and lack the physical space to do much as well.
the Blame Game (Score:3)
That sounds intentionally deceptive / deflecting. Makes it sound like Young People broke into the R&D labs and rewrote the blueprints, and forced the manufacturers to remove physical buttons, without their consent or ability to say NO.
This isn't about them being responsible for it, it's about car marketing analysts doing research on their customers, and coming to the conclusion that this is what they will buy, while paying little to no attention to what they really want or need. Without thinking about how this will pan out down the road. And now they're seeing all the backlash and pushback and are hunting for someone to blame.
It's like the parents blaming their kid for his cavities, while ignoring their parental responsibilities. "We gave him the candy because he liked it, so the outcome is all his fault!"
Nobody wants to take responsibility for the state of modern car interfaces, because they're all doing it, and the first one or two that accept responsibility are going to take a temporary hit to their image. They all want to change back, but instead they're all standing around looking at each other, "well, c'mon, you do it first!" so they can all quietly make the same change in a year or two and escape the hole they're in. They all want to change back, but nobody wants to be first.
Reminds me a lot of headphone ports on smart phones. Pretty much at once everybody added a headphone port to their phones. It was a bit of a design nightmare, being physically tethered to your phone, but everybody went "all in" on it, and nobody could give it up because they knew their rivals would all jump on the opportunity to lambast their rival for dropping such a mainstream feature. Finally, after bluetooth was starting to mature, Apple finally bit the bullet and removed the jack. And just as expected, multiple big names dragged them through the alley in their marketing, for having gotten rid of a feature that "everybody loved". They kept up the gas-lighting while their designers quietly erased the headphone jack from their next design. Then like a switch, they quit panning Apple's lack of headphone jack as they released their next model that didn't have one either.
I expect the same thing's going to happen with car interfaces. A few manufacturers are going to bite the bullet and make the necessary changes, get slammed in the media for a year or two, and then everybody else is going to quietly make the same change.
no buy (Score:3)
I am actually thinking about my next BMW (my current one is getting old). Knowing this, the iX3 is off the list.
BMW had a great control system, intuitive, possible to do many things without even looking. "Young people prefer" ? Really? The young people that actually buy your cars? Well, they'll learn and not prefer touchscreens anymore on the 2nd car.
So why can't you multitask with buttons? (Score:2)
While in motion... (Score:3)
...it's nearly impossible to stabilize a finger well enough to use a touchscreen, even on a relatively smooth road.
It's totally impossible to use a touchscreen without looking at it.
It's often necessary to pull over and stop in order to use the controls.
Bull. This is about money! (Score:2)
Those screens are cheaper. Once you put in a computer and a touch screen, you do not need ANY other buttons.
So they cheap out and remove as many as they can.
If you have a physical button and a week driving that car you can get to it without taking your eyes off the road.
A screen based system requires you to take your eyes off the road which makes 'multi-tasking' harder. No competent driver that has experienced a real button wants a touch screen while driving.
This is entirely about saving the cost of putti
Accident bait (Score:2)
Wonderful idea.
Make it absolutely necessary to stop watching the road to find the defrost button.
Any dashboard designed without tactile controls that the driver can confidently adjust without looking was designed by a fucking idiot.
"Oh, I was adjusting the heat, officer. I didn't see that person and didn't mean to hit them."
Good excuse. Accidents happens when people don't or can't see where the hell they're driving. So some fucktard hallucinates a scenario where the snowflakes stop buying their vehicle beca
"Young people" are buying new BMW's? (Score:2)
I know a chunk of people in the 20-30 age range, and I'm pretty sure they're not shopping for new BMW's, nor grading them on "number of physical controls". If you want to save $10 and later charge a monthly fee for climate control knobs, just say so. We already know, and you're just making yourself look silly.
Re: (Score:2)
From a 7 year old article [hedgescompany.com] on the subject:
The median age of a new BMW owner is 56 years old.
Age Breakdown of New Buyers:
* Under 24: 1%
* 25 to 54 years: 40%
* 55 to 64 years: 29%
* 65 years and older: 30%
My read: some 60%+ of BMW buyers grew up thinking power windows and power locks are luxuries. And probably struggled to program a VCR back in the day. It's not the tech-literate customer base that BMW thinks it is, or rather I think BMW knows exactly who buys their cars but want some new blood.
They want things done quickly (Score:2)
> They want things done quickly
so let's bury climate controls behind 3 layers of laggy touch menus? A whole lot of bs there.
multitasking in a car (Score:2)
If that's true, then these hypothetical younger BMW buyers are likely very poor drivers.