How about touchscreens in cars

[niky]

With solid state, failure should be rare.

Of course, if the failure is software related, there's sometimes the danger of bricking the whole system. Which means an expensive processor module swap.

 

[GattigerPlay]

Thesis for University or what?

Industrial Design course

I'm exploring this new in-car interface to see if, and how, it can be used and improved, especially in terms of interface usability

 

[Wolfe]

@homeforsummer -- On the Model S, I'm speaking more from personal preference than anything. I accept that I'm not even remotely close to a potential customer in the first place. However, you make a good point about it displaying the nearest charging station. I forgot about that. If I had a smartphone, I think I'd rather just have an app for that. And if my phone was completely dead, then I would grant sacrificing a sliver of range to power it.

So with respect, "Fancy tech almost always becomes a liability" sounds more like something someone who doesn't like fancy tech in the first place would say to justify its absence, than it is speaking from experience.

From central locking gremlins (on six different cars!) to ghost-possessed power windows (glitched auto-rolldown), traction control that begins randomly braking in the middle of a highway, and other electronic cock-ups, I'm speaking from experience when I say I don't trust auxiliary electronics in cars any longer than about 15 years. I don't think it's realistic to expect everything to work for so long anyway.

With that said, fancy technology isn't bad because it's fancy. Fancy tech is bad when it's a vulnerability. If you have rain-sensing wipers with other conventional settings, and the rain-sensing bit breaks, no big deal. But if rain-sensing was the only thing your wipers could do, you have broken wipers, and the manufacturer's decision to make them purely rain-sensing was a stupid one. They could also start randomly wiping on dry sunny days, which would be annoying.

The more a car depends on snazzy luxuries, the more vulnerable it is. Which is why, in the long run, I don't think a single touchscreen for everything is a great idea. It would only take that one thing for all of your dashboard functionality to be knocked out.

 

[homeforsummer]

@homeforsummer -- On the Model S, I'm speaking more from personal preference than anything. I accept that I'm not even remotely close to a potential customer in the first place. However, you make a good point about it displaying the nearest charging station. I forgot about that. If I had a smartphone, I think I'd rather just have an app for that. And if my phone was completely dead, then I would grant sacrificing a sliver of range to power it.

Don't forget the functions that let you update the car's firmware or the HD backup camera either There's certainly enough functions on that screen to make it necessity, rather than simply a nicety. Though I suppose you could tie that in to your other comment:

The more a car depends on snazzy luxuries, the more vulnerable it is. Which is why, in the long run, I don't think a single touchscreen for everything is a great idea. It would only take that one thing for all of your dashboard functionality to be knocked out.

...In that every major function in the Tesla aside from actually driving the thing is controlled through the screen.

Though that's then the incentive to make that screen work as well as possible. I think the trouble is, people equate them to this sort of thing:

From central locking gremlins (on six different cars!) to ghost-possessed power windows (glitched auto-rolldown), traction control that begins randomly braking in the middle of a highway, and other electronic cock-ups, I'm speaking from experience when I say I don't trust auxiliary electronics in cars any longer than about 15 years. I don't think it's realistic to expect everything to work for so long anyway.

...which I'm not sure is a truly accurate picture of the longevity of modern systems. Or modern electronics in general, despite their complexity in modern cars.

Put it this way, despite the complexity of your average touchscreen system, it's physically less complex than say, a vulnerable little rocker switch that you use to wind electric windows up and down (that's one thing I prefer being entirely manual, but that's a whole other kettle of fish in itself...). The switch can clog with dirt, or some ham-fisted oaf can lean on it for a straight decade, or water can get into it via various channels in the door. Ditto for central locking.

Naturally, the reliability of current systems remains to be seen. I've never bought a used car with an old system (to be fair, they cost so much back in the day that few used cars I can actually afford are likely to have them) so I've no idea of their reliability. I'd naturally expect new ones to be better than old ones, but we'll have to wait even longer to see what they're like.

In terms of the original question of ease of use though, the issues people seem to have with touchscreens are hugely overplayed. Sites like Jalopnik moan about them a couple of times and the megaphone effect makes out like they're all dangerously complicated and unusable on the move, which is a load of balls.

 

[McLaren]

I see that, in lieu of actually defending a point, "lol White and Nerdy you're so stupid" is assumed to be close enough to one. You should go back to having an avatar.

After several debates with not only myself, but several other members, there is zero reason to attempt having a legitimate argument with him anymore. He does nothing but constantly spew his ignorance & brings up his tired ridiculous ideas about how he believes cars would be better with his views. And every time someone else challenges him in one thread & shows him why he's wrong, he just posts it again in another thread. Almost every Cool Wall thread turns into this festival when he decides to post, "His take".

The things he's posted in this thread aren't even worthy trying have a debate with. Steering wheel buttons add weight & complications? Complications, sure if you don't know how to work the settings on the dash, but adding weight as if it makes a significant impact is laughable.

Thinking about it, yes, three would do.

Lexus has an interesting way forward for control knobs... the GS has a puck that has haptic feedback in the form of button "detents"... as you scroll the puck around, you can feel it fall into pits when the on-screen cursor alights on a button... so if you're familiar with the menu, you can reach oft-used functions simply by feel.

Veeeery nice system.

The only issue with the GS is the sensitivity of it with the small selections such as trying to manually change between the 6-preset radio selections to the next 6. It's easy to fly by it on to something else.

The IS system itself works well, but first model year problems have left it laggy & it throws itself into a fit if you try to do too much at once. The LS system is pretty much flawless, unsurprisingly.

 

[Harry6784]

After several debates with not only myself, but several other members, there is zero reason to attempt having a legitimate argument with him anymore. He does nothing but constantly spew his ignorance & brings up his tired ridiculous ideas about how he believes cars would be better with his views. And every time someone else challenges him in one thread & shows him why he's wrong, he just posts it again in another thread. Almost every Cool Wall thread turns into this festival when he decides to post, "His take".

I know right. God forbid two people have different opinions on the internet...

 

[Wolfe]

In terms of the original question of ease of use though, the issues people seem to have with touchscreens are hugely overplayed. Sites like Jalopnik moan about them a couple of times and the megaphone effect makes out like they're all dangerously complicated and unusable on the move, which is a load of balls.

As a gamer/computer sort of person, I found BMW's iDrive more straightforward than the press was making it out to be, back in 2005. But I also fiddled with it mostly from the passenger seat, while my father drove us from Koblenz to Nürburg. I do think it's inconvenient to flip menus/modes to reach separate radio/HVAC stuff...I'm not a fan of "one system for everything." I still prefer buttons to a touchscreen. Like you, I prefer manual windows. I also miss the manual vent sliders from my E30. The electric vent channel thingies in the Legacy get stuck when it's cold, and there's no button for "face+defog".

Luxuries can be nice -- I thought the rain-sensing wipers on that newer BMW were a nifty and unobtrusive feature -- but given the choice, I fall more in line with Colin Chapman's philosophy. Someday I want to construct a "Locost" Seven replica, to have a sportscar that was built "my way."

As for the rest of your post, I agree. Ultimately, we'll have to wait and see how things go in terms of longevity.

 

[eiriksmil]

That strikes me as a poor idea when it comes to the car being a reasonable ownership prospect secondhand and outside its warranty period. It'd write the car off if it failed - and it's an electronic feature on a Peugeot...

On the other hand.. As long as they are easily accessible, some nuts and a contact and I guess it's out. Down the road, I don't see a reason why these hvac controls at a yard should be relatively much more expensive than current yard parts.. I'm not frightened - other than the French part of course.

To 'electronics always fail' comments based on bad electric windows and yadda yadda.. My beater has no mechanical door handle, it broke off.. **** parts are **** no matter if they are electronic or mechanical.

 

[Tornado]

After several debates with not only myself, but several other members, there is zero reason to attempt having a legitimate argument with him anymore. He does nothing but constantly spew his ignorance & brings up his tired ridiculous ideas about how he believes cars would be better with his views. And every time someone else challenges him in one thread & shows him why he's wrong, he just posts it again in another thread.

Several people have been debating a point extremely similar to his own. Dismissing what he's saying out of hand simply because he's saying it without acknowledging any of the actual rebuttals to the points in this thread means you're dismissing everyone who expresses the same opinion or feels the same way; particularly when you go out of your way (as you have in this thread) to purposely ignore when others try to defend his viewpoint and go so far as to say it is purely a luddite attitude.



I don't like the idea of touch screens replacing regular controls outright. I don't like it because the experiences I've had with them for years now (the systems installed in the two best selling midsized sedans of the past 5 years) had systems that were no better than the one in the Seville I test drove two weeks ago. The Seville that was built in 2003 whose system as practically a Double DIN dropin that was just introduced the previous year, while BMW was busy foisting iDrive on people and you could still get a nav system that didn't have a map. They weren't any more responsive to touch. They weren't any easier to adjust things while driving without looking at the screen. All three of them have steering wheel controls, but those are an example of why steering wheel controls are a good thing since they are completely another thing from touch screen controls. The Ford system is laid out better and was faster to go from menu to menu; but the Camry is worse in every measure than both of them. The main difference in functionality is that the Seville only had radio controls, whereas on the other two I would have to worry about screwing around with the heater and air con too if they didn't have buttons because I have to go into separate menus to do that crap from the screen.

Now, Tesla with their massive screen that takes up the entire dashboard doesn't have that problem I suspect; but since that's really the only car with anything like that but not the only car that is trying to forgo physical buttons almost entirely in favor of just using a touchscreen, I don't think worrying about automakers to save a buck to implement something that does not work as well is an unwarranted fear.

Almost every Cool Wall thread turns into this festival when he decides to post, "His take".

Actually, almost every Cool Wall thread turns into a festival when someone posts something mildly incorrect (if you can even claim that much, as shown in that idiocy over the Shelby GT350) which is ignored the first time and White and Nerdy does what might as well amount to the forum equivalent of a retweet and suddenly the entire thread devolves into how foolish White and Nerdy (and whoever agrees with him) is for having that opinion. And among that mob beating up on him tends to be the same handful of people who regularly say equally idiotic and ignorant (or even worse) things when left to their own devices, but are ignored because now they're part of the cool club. It's getting pretty disgusting around here that if you have an opinion about something (like, say, not fully getting behind the ruthless engine downsizing campaigns), you have to worry not about defending it yourself; but about White and Nerdy (and to a lesser extent Slashfan) also having it because if they do you might as well be just as much of a joke as he is.

 

[McLaren]

I know right. God forbid two people have different opinions on the internet...

There's a difference between an opinion that has a valid thought behind it & one that posts, "You like what I don't like, thus you are not a car enthusiast".

Several people have been debating a point extremely similar to his own. Dismissing what he's saying out of hand simply because he's saying it without acknowledging any of the actual rebuttals to the points in this thread means you're dismissing everyone who expresses the same opinion or feels the same way; particularly when you go out of your way (as you have in this thread) to purposely ignore when others try to defend his viewpoint and go so far as to say it is purely a luddite attitude.

Except he does acknowledge rebuttals. He acknowledges them with the same ill-informed views of the world, and even after someone finally makes a debate ending point, he goes right into the next thread with the same view. He did this exact same thing in the Premium forum when he brought up MLP or how the world is against his career, even after everyone said they were sick of it or gave him advice, til' the mods had to post a warning to stop.

Actually, almost every Cool Wall thread turns into a festival when someone posts something mildly incorrect (if you can even claim that much, as shown in that idiocy over the Shelby GT350) which is ignored the first time and White and Nerdy does what might as well amount to the forum equivalent of a retweet and suddenly the entire thread devolves into how foolish White and Nerdy (and whoever agrees with him) is for having that opinion. And among that mob beating up on him tends to be the same handful of people who regularly say equally idiotic and ignorant (or even worse) things when left to their own devices, but are ignored because now they're part of the cool club. It's getting pretty disgusting around here that if you have an opinion about something (like, say, not fully getting behind the ruthless engine downsizing campaigns), you have to worry not about defending it yourself; but about White and Nerdy (and to a lesser extent Slashfan) also having it because if they do you might as well be just as much of a joke as he is.

Oh please, don't even attempt to act like this is a case of a "cool club" that gets the run of the place and can do whatever they like. This guy brings this upon himself because of his 1-sided view of the world. If it isn't what he likes, it isn't what people he deems of manliness like either, such as what you happen to like by your avatar. You know full well it's complete idiocy to have such a viewpoint & he translates it onto cars as well; that's what gets on everyone's nerves.

If he doesn't like I4s and hybrids, that's fine. But, to act like they are the downfall of man & only men drive V8s and watch Footloose is absurd. And the worrying part is there's a few youngsters in here that have similar views, but at least they try to present a reason for their views & can actually learn where they have the wrong idea about certain parts of the car industry. This guy just throws it out the window & tacks it as another reason we're doomed.

Slash gets cut some slack because if it isn't something that regards Mustangs or Ford pickups (again, also a person mods have had to say stop to), he'll have a pretty reasonable view on things. Some things though, such as this thread, he clearly hasn't had the experience with to make such claims against, possibly due to his young age.

 

[GattigerPlay]

How about the feedback of the screen?
Do you prefer to have a sort of vibration or sound when pressing the "buttons"?
Can we go back in topic and avoid to squabble?

 

[Tornado]

Except he does acknowledge rebuttals.

I was talking about you in this thread. I note this post of yours still doesn't do so.

Oh please, don't even attempt to act like this is a case of a "cool club" that gets the run of the place and can do whatever they like.

Or what? You think I'm the only one who's complained how certain opinions largely get ignored; but as soon as White & Nerdy does so much as parrot them the entire thread gets instantly derailed into trying to make him look foolish? You're not correcting his opinion. You know that and I know that. You're strengthening his resolve and drowning out any value a thread might have had if people just ignored him.




And you couldn't be doing a better job proving my point if you were trying.

This guy brings this upon himself because of his 1-sided view of the world. If it isn't what he likes, it isn't what people he deems of manliness like either, such as what you happen to like by your avatar. You know full well it's complete idiocy to have such a viewpoint & he translates it onto cars as well; that's what gets on everyone's nerves.

So explain how that applies to this thread. For example:

If he doesn't like I4s and hybrids, that's fine. But, to act like they are the downfall of man & only men drive V8s and watch Footloose is absurd. And the worrying part is there's a few youngsters in here that have similar views, but at least they try to present a reason for their views & can actually learn where they have the wrong idea about certain parts of the car industry. This guy just throws it out the window & tacks it as another reason we're doomed.

I don't see the word "touchscreen" in that entire paragraph.

Slash gets cut some slack because if it isn't something that regards Mustangs or Ford pickups (again, also a person mods have had to say stop to), he'll have a pretty reasonable view on things. Some things though, such as this thread, he clearly hasn't had the experience with to make such claims against, possibly due to his young age.

And yet people with experience are making those same claims, but you're blowing them off to focus on fighting the good fight to make absolutely sure noone takes those opinions seriously anyway; to the detriment of people who actually give a damn about arguing the topic rather than just scoring brownie points for how good someone got one of them this time. A broken clock is right twice a day, and when 1438 minutes of that day is already dedicated to (loudly and obnoxiously) calling attention to how wrong the time is to the extent of not actually saying what the time should be, the last two minutes don't need to be wasted on such a venture as well.

 

[McLaren]

And yet people with experience are making those same claims, but you're blowing them off to focus on fighting the good fight to make absolutely sure noone takes those opinions seriously anyway; to the detriment of people who actually give a damn about arguing the topic rather than just scoring brownie points for how good someone got one of them this time. A broken clock is right twice a day, and when 1438 minutes of that day is already dedicated to (loudly and obnoxiously) calling attention to how wrong the time is to the extent of not actually saying what the time should be, the last two minutes don't need to be wasted on such a venture as well.

What response do you want to your posts ? You've driven 2 cars with touchscreens that you said are junk, but that doesn't change the fact that touchscreens have still gotten better since their introduction. Mine works perfectly fine & it's 7 years old now. The screens have worked fine in all the cars I've experienced at work. HFS has said the same thing & he drives many, many more cars than probably anyone else besides maybe niky.

As for the other post, I never said steering wheel button & touchscreens mean they're better cars; the overall build does. What I did say is that steering wheel controls are a forgotten feature that negate the thought, "You have to take your eyes off the road".

There's your "rebuttal". So you can cut your bulls*** that you're defending W&N's post. What you are doing is attempting to make an argument with me for the sake of proving a point that everyone gangs up on W&N and nothing more. Nothing you posted beforehand warranted a rebuttal because you made general statements. You had 2 cars that don't work, not sure what you want to me to say other than it doesn't change the improvements of touchscreens overall. As mentioned, never said touchscreens/steering wheel buttons is what makes the cars better, but they do eliminate the need to fiddle with the dash.

 

[eiriksmil]

I'm still waiting for someone to bring up manual transmissions lol..

I never knew touch screens in cars could get so many panties in a bunch.. Touchy subject for grown men I guess lol.

 

[Slash]

There's nothing inherently wrong with touchscreens. Modern day tech has really done a decent job at refinement, though there is definitely progress that can still be made. Personally, I would rather have buttons and no access to a lot of the features they come with but it's really all opinion and preference. Honestly, I'm happy with this:

 

[Tornado]

What response do you want to your posts ?

Some acknowledgement when you throw around that garbage where you imply some of the people who take issue with these things are the ones simply who have no experience with them or are just talking because luddites would certainly be nice; rather than making the grandstanding posts and ignoring everything that argues on their side when they have a point.

As for the other post, I never said steering wheel button & touchscreens mean they're better cars; the overall build does. What I did say is that steering wheel controls are a forgotten feature that negate the thought, "You have to take your eyes off the road".

No. What you actually said was "constant feature always ignored by these 2-3 guys who continue to believe cars are better when they were built as they were from the past", which is a particularly odd thing to say because up until then noone had said or even implied anything of that nature; and if you're trying to make the argument that you aren't pulling this nonsense simply because of who said it rather than anything bad they actually said you kind of need to have a reason to say such a thing when you don't pull the same attitude towards the people they were responding to in the first place who said the same thing (when you even bothered to respond).

There's your "rebuttal". So you can cut your bulls*** that you're defending W&N's post.

Oh boy. Now a barely restrained display of anger. Are you going to beat me up?

What you are doing is attempting to make an argument with me for the sake of proving a point that everyone gangs up on W&N and nothing more.

You're doing a very good job of that yourself, since you're half a dozen posts in on this thread and this is the first one where you've actually said anything about the topic rather than your low opinion of some of the people posting in it.

I mean, lets examine the two posts Slash made that warranted this entire crusade by you:

I fully agree with Mikey here. I've always preferred mechanical.

I want knobs and switches for everything. Radio, windows, lights, footpegs, wipers etc.

Neither of which seem particularly worth ire. And for clarity, the two posts they were referring to:

Hate touch screens to control radio/heater functions in a car, I prefer knobs and buttons I can feel without taking my eyes off the road. As for social networking features... They have no place in a car, pull over and use your smartphone.

I don't mind using a touch screen for things like the radio, but you better leave knobs for the AC

And now the one post White & Nerdy made:

And if it can't be operated from the dash or console without causing significant distraction, it may not actually have a legitimate place on a car's feature list.

What a 🤬 idiot, that White & Nerdy. amirite?

Nothing you posted beforehand warranted a rebuttal because you made general statements. You had 2 cars that don't work, not sure what you want to me to say other than it doesn't change the improvements of touchscreens overall.

Actually, what I said was I've driven two cars, modern cars that presumably fall under being leaps and bounds above early systems, with touchscreens that don't work as well as buttons.

As mentioned, never said touchscreens/steering wheel buttons is what makes the cars better, but they do eliminate the need to fiddle with the dash.

And steering wheel buttons diminishing the issues some people have with touchscreens still doesn't equal a plus for touchscreens over regular controls, which is the entire thing you took issue with since that was the only thing Slash/White & Nerdy had said before you started going ballistic on people again.

 

[McLaren]

Oh boy. Now a barely restrained display of anger. Are you going to beat me up?

I'll do you one better.

Ah, that's better.

 

[Harry6784]

I'm still waiting for someone to bring up manual transmissions lol..

Discuss....

 

[Northstar]

I used to hate touch screens until I drove a Buick Enclave which has 53 buttons on the center console alone. It doesn't help that they are all small and tightly bunched. Apart from it being very difficult to do anything without looking it just looks terrible(Granted, that is a trademark of GM interiors, but still...).

Now compare that with the touch screen equipped version.

It just makes it look much more organized and cleaner (I've never driven one with a touchscreen so I can't comment on the functionality of it).

 

[ukfan758]

I personally like the touchscreens as long as there are still dials for basic things like volume and climate control. I really like digital speedometers as it is easier for me to watch my speed with those.

 

[homeforsummer]

How about the feedback of the screen?
Do you prefer to have a sort of vibration or sound when pressing the "buttons"?
Can we go back in topic and avoid to squabble?

It'd be nice, wouldn't it?

Most touchscreens I've used have had audible feedback rather than haptic feedback, but I don't mind eitherway. My few-years-old TomTom satnav has no feedback other than whatever you've pressed doing some function or other, and I get on fine with that as well.

I'm not sure whether it's been discussed, but one of the most useful features I've found in a handful of vehicles with touchscreens is to actually have a "rest" to put your palm or your thumb while you're using the screen.

If there's one thing that can be a problem with touchscreens it's that jabbing at a flat surface with a hovering hand can be difficult if the road gets a little bumpy. Having somewhere to kind of latch onto with a thumb eliminates that problem somewhat.

There's nothing inherently wrong with touchscreens. Modern day tech has really done a decent job at refinement, though there is definitely progress that can still be made. Personally, I would rather have buttons and no access to a lot of the features they come with but it's really all opinion and preference. Honestly, I'm happy with this:

That stereo does actually remind me of why I've gravitated to the touchscreen stuff in recent years.

The buttons on that are nice and obvious and easy to use. The stereo on my first car was also excellent in that regard - one of the first real integrated systems I can remember being used but double-DIN too so the buttons were nice and chunky. This one is basically identical:

The next car I had used a single-DIN aftermarket one. Bloody awful to use on the move. The next car? Back to an integrated system high up on the dash. This is my very car's interior:

Next car? Another integrated system. Again, my car below*. Harder to see the stereo here but you'll note there are barely any buttons and those that are there are big and chunky:

The Honda? Back to a single-DIN aftermarket job that I find literally unusable. Several major functions are held by buttons that are maybe a millimeter tall and five millimeters wide. It's getting replaced as soon as I have the funds by something with proper-sized buttons.

Basically, this is a long-winded way of saying that the size of the controls and placement on the dash are far more important to me than the actual nature of the system. A big touchscreen mounted high on the dash with big on-screen buttons is infinitely preferable to me than a nasty hidden-away thing with buttons you can barely see with the naked eye.


* I don't care if it makes me an old git to say this, but I still bloody love the Rover 75's interior. Proper mini-Bentley feel to it. That's also real wood, y'know...

 

[Joey D]

How about the feedback of the screen?
Do you prefer to have a sort of vibration or sound when pressing the "buttons"?
Can we go back in topic and avoid to squabble?

The MyFordTouch system makes a "bonk" type of noise when I push the buttons, seems well enough and lets me know I pressed what I needed too. I think a haptic feedback system would be sort of annoying since I already hate it when a phone does that.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Makes the wheel heavier & more complicated. I <3 light wheels.

The Elise mk2 has lighter window mechanisms because it dropped manual roll-down windows for electronic equivalents. Progress through digital means does not always mean heavier.

 

[Joel]

I used to hate touch screens until I drove a Buick Enclave which has 53 buttons on the center console alone. It doesn't help that they are all small and tightly bunched. Apart from it being very difficult to do anything without looking it just looks terrible(Granted, that is a trademark of GM interiors, but still...).

It just makes it look much more organized and cleaner (I've never driven one with a touchscreen so I can't comment on the functionality of it).

Yeah I loved the Enclave we had but the console was really bad and quite ugly compared to the rest of the car. The newer interior with the screen looks like something that can legitimately go toe to toe with the Germans while the older interior still had that "tarted up Chevy" look to it as nicer GM products can tend to.

 

[Montanan46]

I personally do not like touchscreen. I have driven a number of cars with them, and as a former accident investigator, I find them to be a dangerous distraction. I don't even have my cell phone while driving. Too much of a distraction while driving.
I am in the market for a new car, but refuse to buy one with a touch screen. I currently own a Buick and was interested in a new one, but I have no choice about the touch screen. There are those who like them and those who don't, but when manufacturers expect me to pay for features I have no use for. Give us a choice. New vehicles are going up in price bad enough as it is, so don't keep adding features and expect me to be a sheeple and follow like alenning and pay for these items. Some manufacturers have vehicles available without touch screens, but they are usually the base, stripped down model. I enjoy a lot of the features available, but have little or no use for others.

Guess I'll quit looking for a new car now.

 

[YSSMAN]

Well, with the NHSTA making reverse cameras standard for 2018+, I'm guessing that you'll see screens - touch or not - going forward. Most model revisions will probably start making moves by 2016, or they'll start making them standard regardless. Apparently the NHSTA seems to think it'll add about $200 to the price of most cars, and that isn't bad, but it certainly means that any design features of having a rear to see out of are going to go out the window.

 

[niky]

Want the features but in a low-distraction format? Get a Mazda3.

AC control is still separate and sometimes analogue, while the center touchscreen is mounted high up in line-of-sight, with simple single row menus for navigation and entertainment. It also comes bundled with a control puck that's very easy to use without looking.

 

[ExigeEvan]

@YSSMAN - The screens will be touch screens, it's nearly impossible to source a screen less than 10 inch that isnt touchscreen these days and obsolescence is a growing concern on non - touch displays. Whether the software enables is a different matter.

Drove a C4 Picasso yesterday, touchscreen was poorly set up, really wasn't a fan of it. More buttons please.

 

[Robin]

Touch screens only are really stupid from a usability point of view because there is no tactility. Also single din's are pretty horrible because of the tiny buttons. Companies do touch now because a big screen looks cool to young people and it's much cheaper than having buttons with a separate screen.

Good old double din's with different shaped well spaced buttons were the best. Something Ford tended to do pretty well.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Touch screens only are really stupid from a usability point of view because there is no tactility.

My VW had a fully touch screen media interface and I had no problem reaching or touching it... unless what you mean is that there is no haptic feedback rather than you can't touch it?

There is if you leave the vibrate function on, the screen responds to your touch with haptic feedback, worked very nicely indeed and much more powerful than the archaic array of fixed single-function buttons that you describe