EVs are expensive right now and the prospective buyers are hardly concerned with saving a few cents per mile. What they are concerned with is slow recharging, battery degradation and the mandatory survelliance module in the car.
This, and absurd touchscren interfaces. I like to adjust controls, without taking eyes off road, but hey, that's crazy talk I guess.
It is a false dichotomy to assert “auto” anything requires a touch screen interface. We have the technology for both analog interfaces and “auto” climate control.
To me, I'd rather not waste large swaths of the dashboard with buttons and knobs I'd never press compared to having it be actually useful like navigation information. Its easier to quickly glance at a map and get useful information from it when the information is bigger than when its smaller.
Literally half of the buttons on the dashboard of one of my car never get pressed. Its wasted space. Meanwhile almost all of the screen on my big screen car gets used every time I drive.
Which means your eyes were not on the road every single time you used this interface. Even if you had “wasted space” in your previous analog UI, none of that wasted space took your eyes off the road. The same cannot be said for the vast majority of touch screen user interface interaction.
Analog controls are superior for car user interfaces. Touch screens have a use case, but rarely in moving vehicles.
I’m not being obtuse. There is no argument that favors touch screen interfaces where human attention is the difference between life and death. Smart cars can have analog inputs. There is no need to choose between one or the other.
As a driver, my hands practically never leave the steering wheel. Media controls happen by the buttons on the steering wheel or voice commands. Climate is automatic. Heated seats are automatic. Heated steering wheel is automatic. The large screen makes it easier to see the directions and layout of the roads I'm approaching.
Meanwhile, when I'm not driving my car, the larger screen makes it easier to update the navigation. It makes it easier to plan out the route. It makes it easier for making any fine tuning to the literally hundreds of different settings on my car, settings I really don't need a dedicated button taking up space the 99.9% of the time I'm not pressing the button.
Note I'm not a Tesla fanboy, I do think some physical controls are good. Having useful stalks is nice, being able to control things like wipers is still useful as they're not quite 100% yet. However, a thermostat is a solved problem.
As a driver, never having to take my hands off the wheel is preferred to physical knobs. And if I never have to take my hands off the wheel, what does it matter if the other controls are physical or not?
Perhaps you should not be using a map while driving. My argument was not analog controls can do anything touch screens can do. Adding distraction via touch screen interface by definition decreases safety. You should pull over to a safe place and use maps in whatever way you choose.
I accept you can prove a touch screen is useful for map navigation. But map navigation is not something a driver should be doing while driving.
Why fixate on touch screen controls? Your argument is stronger if voice controlled software makes adjustments. As with cell phones, society has decide to allow hands free phone use despite the fact that this is definitely less safe than no phone use. No maps usage while driving is always safer than the alternative.
I don’t understand the false dichotomy analogies you are using when better analogies like voice control can justify a lack of analog controls. Probably because this kind of voice control does not yet exist?
> what does it matter if the other controls are physical or not?
Because the touch screen controls are not demonstrably safer than physical. Saving space on a dashboard or convenient navigation do not improve safety.
You declare a thermostat a solved problem. I agree. Luckily the existence of thermostat technology is irrelevant to the UX for setting the thermostat. Can’t I have a physical switch just as easily that enables automatic “AI” powered digitally masterful climate control? Why is the touch screen necessary at all for this scenario?
Even then I'd still argue a purely analog interface on your car isn't solely the best car user interface. There's literally over a thousand settings to be changed on my car; are you really suggesting that having a thousand switches, buttons, toggles, and sliders is the preferred way of configuring my car? I imagine not, in which case it makes sense to put those behind a screen. If I'm only going to then be making changes to those while parked, why would it matter to me if I'm then changing those settings on a physical control or a touch screen? Why don't you use your phone with a rotary dial to interface with it?
> Because the touch screen controls are not demonstrably safer than physical.
You're misquoting me, the first part of that sentence is extremely critical for that argument of safety. "And if I never have to take my hands off the wheel..." completely negates your argument of safety.
The touch controls aren't supposed to be interacted much when driving the vehicle. That's what the steering wheel and voice controls are for. Its safer to use the steering wheel controls than it is to take your hand off the wheel and mess with a control on the center console, so if your argument is about maximizing safety having no controls outside of the steering wheel is the best choice. The touchscreen isn't there to be used by the driver while the car is in motion.
> I don’t understand the false dichotomy analogies you are using when better analogies like voice control can justify a lack of analog controls.
I do like voice controls, they work well for me. In fact I do reference them in the above comment with the statement "Media controls happen by the buttons on the steering wheel or voice commands." When I want to change the playlist or switch to the podcast app or whatever, I use voice controls when the vehicle is in motion. I use voice commands for other things like placing a phone call as well.
I do understand some people's frustrations with them as they often have a harder time with hard accents or less common dialects. I'm mostly talking about touchscreens here because the topic at hand is complaining about how cars are getting bigger and bigger screens, which to me is a positive and not a negative. If anything, the increasing usefulness and reliability of voice controls further points to the reason why cars adopting touchscreens and shedding a few more buttons is less and less of a concern.
> Can’t I have a physical switch just as easily that enables automatic “AI” powered digitally masterful climate control?
But, why would you want that? It would be a button I'd press once when I first got the car, and that'd be it. Toggling it off is essentially choosing an uncomfortable car; why would you choose to make your car uncomfortable? And then, if you'd never press that button other than the first time to turn it on, why bother having the button at all? What benefit does a button never pressed actually give?
Why don't we have every single lightbulb in the car have its own toggle button and dimmer knob on the center console? Have several buttons for changing the colors of the accent lighting. Have a dedicated d-pad for controlling the headlight position. Have a set of dial clocks (so you can feel the hands), knobs, and various buttons to set the charging profiles on my EV. A physical button to toggle between HD radio and not. A number pad for phone calls and speed dial, along with a SEND and HANGUP button. A big TUNE knob in addition to SEEK up and down. Fade and balance knobs. Buttons to navigate folders for the MP3 files on a flash drive. Buttons to program the various settings of the MyKey system. Buttons to change between the one stage or two stage unlocking modes of the remotes. A toggle to enable/disable the passive key liftgate. A toggle button to control the liftgate motion control. A few buttons to control the easy entrance/exit. Buttons to control the several different features of the trip computer. Wouldn't that be the preferred way of doing things? Every setting, option, adjustment can be a manual physical control available on the center console. We'll have a center console with hundreds of buttons, dozens of knobs, a few sliders, and touch feedback displays. More buttons, more better, regardless of if they're actually useful or not!
Or maybe, we only bother with physical controls for safety critical features. Turn signals, gear selectors, windows, door locks, door latches, hazard lights, wipers, etc. Then put other commonly used controls as physical controls on the steering wheel, like media controls. Then, everything else that's not commonly used can be behind some kind of menu system on a screen. Hmm, what's been shown to be a popular and useful way to navigate menu systems? Trackballs? Pointer nubs? Wheels? Maybe...a touchscreen??
Why waste useful control space with buttons that never get pressed? Can you please answer that question?
Look, I'm not an anti-button touchscreen maximalist. There's definitely things that make sense as physical controls, I agree! Things that actually do get pressed often should be physical controls, I agree! I wouldn't like for my garage door opener to be buried behind a menu. On my many button car there's a button to turn on the 360 cameras when slowly rolling, I use that a ton when parking but on my touchscreen focused car its behind a menu so its a feature that rarely gets used now. I'm just against interfaces with a ton of buttons that really never need to get pressed. Which for cars with a lot of physical buttons, seems to be well over half the buttons. Hell, cars with a lot of physical buttons have so much space dedicated for buttons there's usually dead buttons, spaces where clearly the designer was expecting they'd need a button but in the end they made the car without it. Clearly that's more useful than having the screen be a bit bigger!
Sure, maybe in a stationary room, and I can think of plenty of times when I have used my heating or cooling system as not a thermostat. Not a sovled problem in cars...
I can also think of several scenarios where touch controls are absolutely inadequate, i.e. they simply don't work, the knobs in my car are simple to manipulate, and I do so regularly.
Now, do I need 6 buttons to operate all the nonsense in my dash, no - ironically the only "wasted" buttons in my car are the ones related to all the digital touchscreen software I never use...
Regarding the GPS - if my phone or dash unit isn't going to read me the right directions, the map unit is useless anyways. The complex stuff I might like the screen for, I need to be paying attention to the road for anyways. That's precisely the wrong time to be learning what the virtual road looks like and ignoring the semi barelling past me on my left as I have three lane changes to make.
I guess an argument could be madr for prepping me visually a couple minutes ahead, but auditory feedback is enough. And I don't even need the car for that - I'm usually wearing a headset anyways, just makes for a more seamless auditory experience, I can answer calls, etc. There is really just no reason I want a large visual map display distracting me while I'm driving.
It is normal to often only have one hand on the wheel. Much of Europe loves manual transmissions, and I do too, and it is perfectly, and completely safe.
What isn't safe is to be looking away from the road ahead of you. At 80mph, common freeways speeds, it's insane to do so.
No current automated controls fix the heat/AC needing to be adjusted, specifically defrosting the windows. Automated wipers suck, and often get it wrong. Mud splashes, must be washed away. Back window fogs, must be addressed. Temps need to be changed, drive modes modified, fog lights turned on, hazard lights engaged to alert traffic around you, on and on and on.
All these things can be manipulated with the same hand I use to switch gears, and one hand driving is perfectly safe...
I don't care if you never do these things. Most people I speak to, do, and when switching to some cars with screens, end up with constant eyes off road.
Throwing automation around is silly. Anyone trying any type of automation experiences edge cases, and often, are simply fighting it.
Lastly, based upon the horrid state of current UI design, the last place I want that is in a car.
We're talking about maximizing safety, not just reinforcing something that is already done. What is safer: one hand on the wheel or two?
> What isn't safe is to be looking away from the road ahead of you. At 80mph, common freeways speeds, it's insane to do so.
At some point in time, I will consult my navigation. Being able to quickly glance and understand the map is important, and a display that's easier to read translates to it being safer. Which is easier to read, a smaller screen with small graphics and small text, or a large one with larger text and graphics?
> No current automated controls fix the heat/AC needing to be adjusted, specifically defrosting the windows.
I forgot that the physics of when a window fogs up is completely unknowable. I guess its impossible for us to figure out the conditions for when a window fogs and make a system to automatically defog them. Oh wait, never mind, this isn't the stone ages, cars can easily know when their windows have the possibility of fogging. There's really zero reason why all cars can't have extremely reliable defoggers; you should really complain to your car maker that you don't have it as I'd say having your car automatically defog improves safety. I have it on my most recent car, once again I never have to press the defog button. My car is already defogged by the time I get to it, and the auto climate makes sure the conditions for a foggy windshield never happens. I don't get why you'd choose to have a car which requires you to manually intervene with the defogger, once again that just seems like yet another distraction making your car less safe.
That said, I will agree things related to critical safety should still have a physical button. On my car with a giant screen, there's still a button over by the headlight control for max defog, in the rare case it somehow gets this wrong. Which has never happened, but OK, I'll agree automation isn't always perfect and this is a safety critical feature.
That draws me to something that is still almost always manual when it really should never be. Headlights! My car does have a manual headlight control with an automatic setting that it never leaves. Sure, you'd say, we need to make sure headlights remain a manual control, its a safety feature! I'd argue the other way. There's practically zero reason for any passenger car to need to turn off their headlights while driving, giving people that control makes us less safe. I see tons of people driving around at night without headlights all because they get a manual say in whether their lights are on or not. Letting people turn their headlights off while driving makes us less safe.
I will agree additional lighting like fog lights should still be a manual control. Once again, critical safety components should still have a physical control.
> temps need to be changed
They really don't though, not while you're driving. The climate conditions in your car probably didn't radically change since you put your car into gear, you're not really going to be noticeably different at 71F vs 72F. Its an additional distraction. I maybe kick the temp up a few degrees in the winter and bring it back down in the spring/summer time, and this happens before the car gets put into gear. Probably four adjustments to the temperature a year, and I say that leaving my house at ~50F right now and it'll be >90F when I leave the office. All the rest of the time, its wasted space on my dashboard. I'm not constantly adjusting the thermostat in my house, I programmed it how I like my house and it dutifully carries it out. Why would I want to constantly be fiddling with the AC when it could be automated? Thermostats are a solved problem. Good auto climate controls have existed since the late 90s, there's little excuse for needing a lot of intervention in your climate control. Let the system do its job and quit getting distracted trying to micromanage it.
> Automated wipers suck, and often get it wrong. Mud splashes, must be washed away.
Here I completely agree with you, and mention so in my last comment. The rules on when and how fast wipers should go on are much harder to automate than the climate or the defrosters or the headlights. While I do use and enjoy my auto-wipers on my cars, they're still not perfect. That said, I prefer for these controls to be on the stalks and not the center console where the touch screen we're talking about is. I wouldn't want to have to reach to the center console to adjust my wipers, that's a regression from the current state of affairs.
> hazard lights engaged to alert traffic around you
Isn't this a legal thing in the US? Kind of worthless to bring up this point as every car in the US is guaranteed to have it regardless of if its got a large touchscreen or not. But once again, I do agree, critical safety features should have physical controls.
That said, there really aren't that many critical safety controls. We've identified what, maybe a handful of them? Wipers, defogger, hazard lights, parking brake, door locks, door levers/handles, window controls, gear selector, maybe mirror adjustment, maybe fog lights if equipped on your car? And even then a lot of those controls shouldn't be in the center console, almost all of those are better placed in other areas. In which case there being a giant touchscreen in the center console makes zero difference about whether those controls are physical or not, as they're not affected by the center console at all.
> based upon the horrid state of current UI design
You know what's horrid UI design? Having to type an address with a wheel. Having a ton of buttons which never get pressed. Needing to read the next turn name in braille or on a tiny screen.
Here's the center console on my car with a lot of buttons[0]. Bluelink? Setup? INFO? C'mon, these buttons get pressed a few times in the entire life of the car. Giant "Climate" button when there's already a lot of physical climate controls wasting space? A huge fan speed selector knob which never gets turned, because once again, auto climate controls, why would I want to micromanage it? Why should I need to manually turn the A/C compressor on or off, the defogger should just know how to control the humidity without me manually intervening. Practically the entire bottom half of this whole button area is darn near worthless to me, it essentially never gets touched.
I do prefer a physical volume knob even though as the driver I don't use it as I've got volume on my steering controls, its nice for the passenger versus some touch slider. That "TUNE" knob though? Its probably only been turned a few times the entire time I've owned the car. I set the presets for the radio stations I listen to and can change those with the steering controls. SEEK? Well, once again I've got steering wheel controls, why do I need that on the center console?
Meanwhile the thing I actually do use on the center console, navigation, suffers from having all these physical buttons that never get pressed. The maps are much smaller and harder to read while driving. Putting in the destination before I get going is far more annoying. Planning out a complex route is way more frustrating than it should be. Changing settings in the car while not driving is more annoying with the smaller screen and a bunch of worthless buttons. Overall the center console is worse for having a lot of buttons, not better.
[0] https://paulgeorgedaniel.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/santa7....
> What is safer: one hand on the wheel or two?
Unless you are riding in a derby, in high wind conditions, or on ice, this is a bad argument. In those conditions, incidentally you want as little distraction as possible, the fact I can't turn what tiny center console I have off is a source of endless frustration...
One hand is fine in most situations, and you need to be able to operate the car, not have your hands glued to the steering wheel.
> They really don't though, not while you're driving.
They really do, though. THERE ARE MORE USES FOR HEATING AND COOLING THAN JUST CLIMATE CONTROL, DEAR BRAINDEAF ELON MUSK.
And I don't mean just fogging windows, although like you admit at least that's almost impossible to automate well in all conditions.
> That draws me to something that is still almost always manual when it really should never be. Headlights!
Completely disagree - most sane implementations are keep them on automatically, with the option to force them on. I'll keep mine on a slightly overcast day just because its more safe, while the automatic setting completely fails to turn them on.
And, flip side, there are numerous situations where you want to keep your lights off not on - I can agree there should be maybe be some alert to the driver if the system detects, say, driving over 5 mph and no lights on, but that's about all the automation I want.
> We've identified what, maybe a handful of them? Wipers, defogger, hazard lights, parking brake, door locks, door levers/handles, window controls, gear selector, maybe mirror adjustment, maybe fog lights if equipped on your car?
Lol that's more than a handful. I'll add some - seat control (for crashes, sun in the eyes), heat/cooling override controls, brakes, pedal, disabling/enabling cruise and lane keep (it breaks, gets obstructed, driver gets tired or bored, or just wants to change their driving style to be safer, or more aggressive as traffic may require), audio/call controls on the steering wheel (or dash, whichever you prefer), so you can take or make emergency calls, or turn off the loud music you were using to stay awake to focus on traffic. Throw one in I haven't seen - a bluetooth pair button would be nice.
> Meanwhile the thing I actually do use on the center console, navigation, suffers from having all these physical buttons that never get pressed.
I can agree center consoles are poorly designed, the ones that have just enough for operation and nothing else (analog radio control or scroll equiv) are better than the touchscreens which always are awkward to operate, smudge, break, and/or eventually just die.
> That "TUNE" knob though? Its probably only been turned a few times the entire time I've owned the car. I set the presets for the radio stations I listen to and can change those with the steering controls.
I guess you have never crossed a state boundary and gone channel hunting. Seek is useful, but you can't configure the amplitude filtering - I can contiue to listen to a station half coming in or I can lose that completely with seek, get whatever nonsense local popular music channel.
Then there's your whole attitude that only a machine can make you more safe. Humans have lapses in judgement, sure, but when machines do, nobody can tell it to "snap out of it". Automatic things are nice, but I should always be able to EASILY override them, otherwise its like I stuck my hand in a blender with no way to stop the proverbial blade, except managing to smash through the glass and rip out the plug with my now mangled hand.
Either you just don't have much realworld experience, or you spent too much money on e.g. a Tesla and can't admit that despite the conveniences, they are horrible designs.
Sure, but purely asking, which is safer? One hand or two? If a key point of having a ton of physical controls is safety while driving, clearly we're trying to optimize for driving safety. So we should ask ourselves, which is safer? One hand on the wheel, or two? If having a lot of physical controls encourages you to only have one hand on the wheel more versus automating things away, is having the physical control actually making you safer, or less safe as it encourages you to take your hand off the wheel and engage with some activity other than driving the car down the road? Shouldn't we then do what we can to encourage drivers to have both hands on the wheel and their attention straight ahead, instead of facilitating workflows which encourage them to take their attention off the wheel and on the center console, regardless of if the center console is a bunch of buttons and knobs or a screen?
> THERE ARE MORE USES FOR HEATING AND COOLING THAN JUST CLIMATE CONTROL
Like...what exactly? If you're relying on your heater core for additional cooling of your ICE, you've got some serious problems and I wouldn't say that's any kind of normal operation of your car.
> almost impossible to automate well in all conditions
Its entirely possible to automate it well in practically all conditions. In my cars with auto defrost I've never had to manually intervene. Its incredibly basic logic on the conditions of a window fogging up. I'm just saying, its entirely possible a sensor would fail and windows can terribly fog up in minutes so it makes sense for a control like this to have a manual override.
> most sane implementations are keep them on automatically, with the option to force them on
Most implementations let you keep them off as much as you want without any complaints. Letting people even have the option to turn off their lights on average makes us less safe.
> And, flip side, there are numerous situations where you want to keep your lights off not on
These are incredibly rare circumstances and practically never when the vehicle is in motion. Maybe if you're operating your car in a warzone or smuggling drugs across a border, but most of us aren't. Please do share incredibly common reasons why you'd want the vehicle in motion and the headlights off and tell me why that's more safe. My motorcycle always has its headlight on when the key is turned to ON, and its never been an issue for me. Likewise, my car's headlights never leave the AUTO mode. I'd leave them to ON, but then they stay on longer when the car turns off and that's just a bit more strain on the ICE's battery than I'd care for.
> heat/cooling override controls
How is this a safety critical control? If you're on auto climate control, its not like the car is going to rapidly become uncomfortable. That's the whole point of auto climate! You're less safe having to manually intervene to change the climate controls versus letting the system keep the car comfortable.
> a bluetooth pair button would be nice
A bluetooth pairing button is a safety critical control to use while driving your car? You're going to be pairing your phone while you drive your car?
You're arguing people should be able to work on pairing their phones with their headlights off while driving their cars, and that car makers should work on making the car's interface facilitate such activity. I'm arguing all of that stuff should be stripped away, we shouldn't facilitate people turning off their headlights or work on bluetooth pairing their phones while driving. And yet you think its me who doesn't have much realworld experience...
I do not and have never owned a Tesla. I've regularly driven about a dozen different cars over the years trending more towards touchscreens. These changes really haven't negatively affected me much at all, and has come with several benefits. Other than the 360 camera engage button missing I greatly prefer the user experience of my more touchscreen focused car. Not necessarily because its more touchscreen, but often because even more of the system is automated and is less I need to worry about coupled with far better navigation experience enabled by the larger screen. I don't need to turn on the steering wheel heater, its on automatically. I don't need to turn on the defrost, its on automatically. I don't need to turn on the heated seat, its on automatically. Please answer me, why would I want to have to manually control all of these things when they can be otherwise be entirely automated?
I haven't had a single screen fail in any of the cars I've owned. I have had buttons break. I've had knobs fall off and be loose. I've had pots burn out. I've had button backlights burn out. I've had buttons jam. I've had the ink on the buttons and knobs wear away. I've had significantly more physical controls fail over the years than I've had screens fail. IME moving parts are more likely to break during their usage than non-moving parts. And its not just that all the cars with screens are new while all the failing buttons are old, the oldest screen on a car I drive every now and then is about a decade old.
The expected maintenance cost of my ICE is then another thousand or so more than the expected maintenance of my EV. Oil changes alone for synthetic oil at a 7,500mi interval for 100,000 is over $900. Add coolant flushes to that, timing chain tune up, probably a water pump replacement in there, and you're well over another $1,000 more than the EV which doesn't have a planned oil change or coolant flush until 150,000mi.
Which is still less than the EV premium right now. A model 3 at ~$45,000 (low end for 2022 model) vs. a civic at ~$30,000 (high end 2022 model).
Even the Nissan leaf is ~$27,000 on the low end, for a vehicle which is incomparable to a Civic.
Base model Mach E is ~$44k. Minus the $7,500 federal tax credit, $36,500. Minus the $11,900 potential lifetime savings brings us to $24,600.
Kia EV6 base is $40,900. Minus federal tax credit, $33,400. Minus the $11,900, $21,500.
VW ID.4 base is $41,230. Minus federal tax credit, $33,730. Minus the $11,900, $21,830.
21,500 < 21,830 < 24,600 < 30,000.
I agree that car consumers are in general very irrational (in the economic sense), and car purchases are often far more about projecting an image than they are about practicality.
But that also means that consumers don't give a damn about slow recharging or battery degradation. It's mostly what will other people think about me for driving this vehicle. Thus the big pickups whose truck beds never see any duty.
I'd buy that the mean new car price is $47k, but that's not the right average if you are trying to estimate typical vehicle acquisition costs.
It's a classic stock versus flow problem in economics. People irrationally over-weight the pain of a big lump sum, and under rate the pain of ongoing monthly payments. They misevaluate even as they convert a stock into a flow with an auto loan.
Similarly, people underestimate the cost of driving everywhere, when they have already sunk so much into the units investment.
I swear that there's something about cars that turns people's brains off. They are so deeply ingrained into our way of life that we basically refuse to consider costs and alternatives.