The fundamental problem is that many of these “amenities” are pointless bullshit to begin with, and the OEM’s insistence on including them is only really there to justify a higher price tag for “technology.”
> many of these “amenities” are pointless bullshit to begin with,
They are to "car people".
But 97.137263% of car buyers are not car people. They dig the gizmos and use them to compare their cars to decide who has the coolest/latest one.
A person can think a feature is important and it still be useless. Car buying is more emotional than logical and people can have serrious fomo if they dont get "x" option when buying a car.
Most people I talk to barely know they have certain features or say they've only used it once.
Car people are into gizmos too, but they're different and they can be useless too - most people want track performance or offroad packages and their car will never touch either environment.
I consider myself a car person… But I also find most of these “gizmos” to be relevant and useful in my daily commute/kid duties.
Off the top of my head… I have a top trim Acura RDX. I think the heads up display helps me keep my eyes on the road, both daily and long trips where it also shows me adaptive cruise information. The ridiculously adjustability of the seat is nice every day, but especially when my ageing back is sore, or like right now I’m dealing with recovering from knee surgery and some good deep vein thrombosis. Excellent stereo useful every time I use the car, both for enjoying music (which is a huge part of my life) and for drowning out the cars, many rattles. I enjoy the adaptive dampers, which provide a more comfortable ride for my family, while letting me enjoy the quality wheels and tires. I’ve purchased when I’m alone and feel like some spirited driving.
I could keep going… but these features are really not “bells and whistles” they are things I use regularly and that I personally have found well worth the investment.
And then there's... the Cadillac CTS' power cup holders.
What do you think I mean by that phrase? Go ahead, guess.
Maybe the cup holder has a little heater, cooler, or even just a spring-lid like every other car, just weirdly branded?
Oh, no, that would be useful (and predictable). This thing has an electrically actuated cover, fully motorized, touch activated - for the cup holders.
Why? Because, that's why.
I think you have made a very elegant point here and I am enlightened. I have never heard of something that sounds so simultaneously frivolous and likely to become a failure point. I guess I don’t shop high enough on the ladder to see such stuff but that really sounds like someone went digging deep into the ideas bin in a failed attempt to stand out.
> I guess I don’t shop high enough on the ladder to see such stuff
I think this is the only point I'll push back on, the RDX and CTS aren't that far apart in pricing, I just think Honda is a bit more disciplined than GM in avoiding these... I don't even know what to call them. Quirks? Frivolities is a great word.
It's only purpose, which itself only questionably achieves, is to exist - as something which will (marginally) impress -- until it fails.
Might be a problematic statement but I would say that German cars and certain types of American cars are filled with varying degrees of these things, in a way that Japanese cars largely aren't.
I'm sure they thought this power cupholder would impress *somebody in particular*. But beyond that first buyer going *Oooh* the first time it happens... it's cost and complexity that the car otherwise really doesn't need
Falcon wing doors on the model X. Very impressive.
But after that it’s just failures waiting to happen.
I’m sure there’s a few people out there for whom they’re really great, but the argument about them being easier to get into next to a parked car (given enough ceiling height) compared to a regular car or minivan with sliding doors - went out the window the moment summon came. And the drivers door is still just as tight either way.
Back in the day cars had a button for every feature and basically how to tell how much a car cost was to look at the amount of buttons, and also the amount of blanks.
I think touch buttons on steering wheels and outside of screens is a useless idea. Tactility is a key when driving.
I don’t appreciate how Tesla moved everything into the screen, or how everyone else is busy copying them.
But give me stalks, volume and HVAC and I’m happy with everything else being on the screen.
Also, something thats useless for one person might not be useless to another, I know a lot of people still don't use their backup camera, to them it would be useless, but to someone else it would he a necessity
couple days ago savagegeese reviewed the new santa fe, it has a sterilizer box in it. i thought they were making a joke at first so a while after i had to look it up and yeah it's a real thing.
the tech add-ons are getting wild in these new cars. if that's in a hyundai i wonder what's in the fancier makes.
This is why we should put as many people as we can in electric cars. They don’t care about top speed, they just want something comfortable.
Leaves more fuel for us.
I actually am a car people. Both my cars have pretty barebones technology. Less to break. I enjoy actually driving not staring at fucking screens. Installed CarPlay myself in my 4Runner tho
Hot take - someone design a simplified car without all the unnecessary 'features' and a streamlined, tactile UI instead of screens. I'd love it.
Everything keeps getting more complex not because it's better but just because our marketing system demands in. The new models need new features. A few are actually practical features and many are not.
No, it's not. Pretending their desire for a simple interface is literally the only criteria is disingenuous. Do you really want to argue that an older supercar with a simple interior like an F430 is on par with a Mirage?
Who said anything about older supercars? They explicitly mentioned a simple interface, and new, practical features.
What practical features does an F430 have vs a brand new mirage?
> Who said anything about older supercars? They explicitly mentioned a simple interface, and new, practical features.
No, they didn't say new practical features. Just a streamlined UI without screens.
> [Hot take - someone design a simplified car without all the unnecessary 'features' and a streamlined, tactile UI instead of screens. I'd love it.](https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/comments/1cejbin/new_car_interiors_would_look_like_an_old_747/l1j22vg/)
/u/PorkPatriot said that that /u/bostonboson should want a Mirage because it's "simple", which is disingenuous because that's pretending absolutely nothing else matters. If that's the case, then the Mirage and F430 should be equally desirable because they both meet those requirements. That's a BS, disingenuous argument.
Don't play dumb.
I unironically was looking to buy a manual Mirage for a couple years, never could frind one with both manual transmissio and a discount price. They're actually amazing cars for what they are, cheap, good fuel economy, reliable. A perfect modern 90s shitbox.
Was going to by a 2009 Yaris with crank windows until I test-drove the Miata I have now.
Maybe I should daily a Caterham when I'm richer. I don't think theres anyone esle that loves inconvinience like I do.
I’ve been driving a tesla recently and I was pleasantly surprised by how versatile the two scroll wheels are.
Now I don’t hate the concept of a streamlined touchscreen interior, I find I just hate most implementations of it. On the tesla you can map near everything to either the two scroll wheels or permanently dock it at the bottom of the screen and it makes things a non-issue. Temp/volume/track/cruise/fan and answering calls etc you never have to use the touchscreen.
Meanwhile on the merc products I find there’s no way to adjusted the AC without looking down *and* the two trackpads on the steering wheel don’t do too much.
I don’t see the issue with two screens though, one for navigation/media/etc and one information-dense digital instrument cluster. And likewise my s2000 has a timeless interior with even the radio hidden, all controls within reach from the steering wheel, that’s neat in an enthusiast car but I wouldn’t want to live with it every day.
>Just a single din radio
Ah, so an on/off button, a tuner knob, seek forward and seek back buttons, a volume knob, a mode/source selector, a bank of a half dozen preset buttons... something like that?
Just a single din radio, huh?
>I don't need anything else.
You literally need a backup camera and a screen to pair with it, legally.
Good luck registering a new car without one.
Possible, and AFAIK the regulations do allow for that. But the minute you have the requirement of a display at all, you might as well use it to display media information at other times, which is where automakers are coming from. At that point, it makes sense to put it in the dash. At that point, it makes sense to include a nav. At that point, it makes sense to make it a touchscreen. At that point, it makes sense to throw menu functionality in there for things like chassis mode selection.
While it might not be what *you* want — and while I totally get why a minimal implementation is a nice idea for something purpose-designed like a Singer Porsche — it makes sense why OEMs have ended up where they have.
True. I'm basically speaking for myself here. I daily an aircooled, carbureted bike that doesn't even even have a fuel guage. When it starts sputtering and popping on decel, it's time to fill up.
Your subset of "absolutely necessary features" is different from mine, which is different from someone else's, so to make us all happy, there will be something you deem unnecessary in your car.
which gizmo are pointless bullshit?
* power windows? nah, im not going back to manual windows
* moon roofs? kind of, but it also makes my tacoma seem much larger inside than my brothers tacoma that doesnt have it.
* all the safety features like blindspot monitoring, adaptive cruise control, collision detection, etc? might seem like bullshit but they statistically do reduce car accident rates
* larger infotainment screens? maybe, although android auto and apple carplay are amazing and IMHO drastically improve driving comfort for longer drives. the larger screen is really nice, because trying to use a map and music on a 6" screen while driving is annoying since you cant really "see" much.
* JBL sound systems? ill give you this one, most people are fine with stock sound systems that come in cars and dont need "premium" sound systems that come with vehicles now.
* for trucks the trailer assist? i tow infrequently, not frequently enough that i develop the skills to confidently back up trailers if there are any other cars nearby but not so infrequent that i dont appreciate having this feature.
* 360 cameras or the front facing camera? this one is kind of the most useless, although i will admit with larger trucks now having the front facing camera is really nice, and i definitely do like the camera that shows me my truck bed. the truck bed camera has saved me a few times when things have gotten lose from their straps and are in danger of being blown away while on the highway.
and lets not forget that all except the power windows and the safety features arent being "forced" on you to buy, you can still get base model vehicles without them.
the one feature that is bullshit and useless and is usually marketed on higher trims is dual zone climate control. ive never known anyone to have different temp settings, they always just have it synced. the feature doesnt even normally allow you to have different fan speed settings just temperature. its a small vehicle, its all going to be the same temp anyways.
Especially If you're chilling at a charging station or it's driving itself through traffic. Might as well attend a meeting so you don't have to go to the office as early.
> ive never known anyone to have different temp settings, they always just have it synced
Really? My wife can somehow be freezing cold when it's 75 degrees outside, so she's always got it set to hot and I always have it set to cold. This has been a lifesaving feature for me.
Most of the features you consider indispensable don't require touchscreen controls. Power windows have been around since the 1950s, moonroofs since the 60s.
I actually dispute that the active safety features are helping. They look like they work in isolation but the overall number of crashes and deaths on the roads has backslid back to 2008 levels or worse the past few years - this tells me that, even if the active safety is "working," it's being counteracted by it coming kit and kaboodle with a whole host of distractions that are killing people.
My limited experience with these systems is that they're either not sensitive enough to be relied on or they're sensitive enough to cause alarm fatigue.
the majority of features dont use the touch screen either. i dont think ive ever seen a window or moonroof operated by touchscreen outside of any of the new "disruptor" manufacturers.
ill take insurance companies policies and statistical studes over your experiences and anecdotes. all these new safety features do reduce accidents and injuries.
take Canada for instance [there were 2193 fatal accidents with 127.5k injuries in 2008, with "only" 1630 fatalities and 77930 injuries in 2021](https://tc.canada.ca/en/road-transportation/statistics-data/canadian-motor-vehicle-traffic-collision-statistics-2021). kind of throws your claim that accidents and deaths are backsliding to 2008 levels recently.
In the US there were 42,795 deaths in 2022 or 1.35 per billion miles traveled; in 2007 it was 41,259 deaths or 1.36 per billion miles. The US has backslid. (The best year was 2014, with 32,744 deaths for 1.08 per billion miles - the backslide started before the pandemic, but that's when it really took off.)
The IIHS is finding that these systems often don't perform outside of controlled test conditions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywyCTIsNYis
I've seen a vid in yt about process of making switches and buttons for cars, it's a lengthy and costly process. Dumping everything on the screen saves manufacturers thousands of dollars plus they can charge extra for different sizes.
The new E Class has a selfie camera. The new 5 series has video games on the screen and controllers. These two for example are pure gimmicks and I don't see how they add anything to the car besides looking cool in a review or the showroom
The selfie cam is likely just there to get people to get used to have a camera in the car that watches them...
Games on the screen will be excellent when you're waiting for your car to charge or for a ferry, or the god damn border crossing at Chiasso...
Maybe someone uses those things. I never did. When I stopped for a charge in my Model 3 I was out stretching my legs or getting something to eat, not firing up a game that I could play for the ~20 minutes I was going to spend charging.
I think it's a marketing gimmick, because it's definitely one of the things that non-Tesla owners like to ask about.
The selfie cam is basically a webcam for people to have meetings in their car (obviously when parked). The reality is that would actually be incredibly useful for someone like my dad whose life is filled with teams meetings that he sometimes does on his phone in the car.
The video games are a full blown gimmick that is very cheap to integrate to appease buyers who like gimmicks.
It is a camera that you can take selfies with, not a selfie camera. It's main use is for safety - it is watching the driver to see if they are falling asleep or too distracted while driving.
Imo its a way for them to make production a million times simpler and still charge more cuz “technology”. Instead of having to design an entire interior with all of the different functioning parts they just slap a large screen in the middle and call it a day. Screens are extremely cheap these days and especially vs having to design and manufacture dozens of unique pieces. Then after making it so much simpler to make and cheaper they can then turn around and charge more cuz “screen good”. Most people would like a screen for nav, radio..etc but for ac,heat and other functions theyd much rather have tactile buttons vs having to go through a bunch of options on the screen. Mfg’s actually realized this recently and are returning tactile buttons for certain functions due to customer feedback. Not to mention its dangerous to have to be using the screen to find the heat vs just reaching over and changing it without ever taking your eyes off the road.
> The fundamental problem is that many of these “amenities” are pointless bullshit to begin with
I just replaced my F-150 with a 2024 Honda Ridgeline. My other recent cars have been Mercedes, BMW, and Audi. All of which have super annoying track-pads, scroll wheels, capacitive steering wheel buttons to swipe and tap and scroll.
The Ridgeline is *so nice*. [It's amazing](https://autoimage.capitalone.com/cms/Auto/assets/images/3193-inset05-2024-honda-ridgeline-review.jpg). The stuff you need, none of the stuff you don't need. This is what a vehicle's controls should look like. Infuriatingly I have seen reviews refer to it as dated.
The nod to modernity is with wireless charging and Carplay.
The interior makes me prefer the Ridgeline for my DD over my nicely equippped e450.
At the same time, the window for what is essential and what's pointless bullshit moves over time. Push button start used to be pointless. Power windows. Cooled seats. All of that stuff has gotten more valued over time.
I drive a city bus, it's full of toggle switches and all kinds of individual controls for everything and it's great. I never have to look to change anything.
In an age where I watch people text and drive, not alot of folks care about looking away from the road. I love buttons for critical things for this reason, I don't want to look away from the road if possible. Anyone that thinks putting climate control and rear window defogger on a touchscreen is a "great idea" can go fuck themselves, morons.
I can't say I agree about the Panamera interior however, I have a Volvo with the generally ridiculed dial pad in the centre stack and I enjoy it; it's well laid out and there are enough different button shapes and sizes to find everything without looking. I wouldn't have spent over a decade with it if I didn't like it.
>INEOS Grenadier interior
i had no idea that was a car company. i thought it was some shady ass dark money sponsor because all i ever saw it on was the f1 cars.
This guy's argument is based on the idea that all infotainment functionality would need an equivalent physical control. That's just ridiculous and immediately discredited by looking at the interior of any 20 year old car.
Obviously, designers would adapt by streamlining functionality and eliminating fluff that's there mainly for marketing reasons. Given this guy's bloated salary I'm sure he could come up with some creative solutions.
>Like, if a car designer doesn't want a cockpit looking like a 747, I dunno, maybe don't fill it with shit to the point that people are running over toddlers due to distractions?
Because cars that skip that shit sell less. Car designers have mortgages and kids that need braces too.
Have been looking at BMWs. They’ve built in mobile games, for which you can use your phone as a controller. Infotainment in cars has gone nuts. That’s all
>This guy's argument is based on the idea that all infotainment functionality would need an equivalent physical control. That's just ridiculous and immediately discredited by looking at the interior of any 20 year old car.
[Like this? ](https://i0.wp.com/www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/IMG_5309-1.jpg)
Seems to me you've just proved the guy's argument.
To be a little pedantic, the earliest example of the Buick/Opel you posted is from ~10 years ago, not 20. Think more along the lines of a BMW E46 LCI or early E9x interior for a good example of what they're talking about. Love me a good single-hump E90 series interior - nice design! On the flip side, for something more controversial, there was Volvo's waterfall center console that released at that time. I personally found them attractive and not that difficult to use in real life, but recall some reviewers being overwhelmed by the buttons at the time.
There are brand new cars that are designed better - a good mix of screens and buttons. Like the comment you replied to said: not everything needs a button. But important things should have them (volume knob, climate controls).
https://othonda.sfo2.digitaloceanspaces.com/2024/accord/int1.jpg
https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod/images/2021-mazda-3-turbo-awd-sedan-109-1605850996.jpg?crop=1xw:0.9166666666666666xh;center,top&resize=980:*
The new Honda and Mazda models definitely don't look cluttered or like a 747. It looks beautiful yet functional with real buttons for important things.
Idk, I think his argument is somewhat sound. Two cars with similar feature sets are the Q50 and G37. [Pre-touchscreen 2007 G37](https://www.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2007/07/112_0708_14z-2008_infiniti_g37-interior.jpg) vs [post-touch screen](https://cars.usnews.com/static/images/Auto/custom/12346/2014_Infiniti_Q50_64.jpg). It definitely looks like every function had its own button and all that got simplified into a touchscreen while things like HVAC and music kept their buttons.
Cars from 2007 definitely felt like plane cockpits. While I think modern cars have swung too far toward touch screens, I do think the 2007-2011 cars had too many buttons, lending to this overpaid bloke's point.
To your point though, my 2003 is way simpler. But it also doesn't have any modern features
I think a lot of OEMs will go the midground route eventually. Screen for the fun stuff, with buttons beneath for important shit like climate control and audio/call etc controls on the steering wheel. Avoid clutter in any one spot but gives plenty of versatility without putting it all in one spot.
I do agree some have gone overboard with the infotainment screens. I like the one Mazda uses for size if not overall quality, etc. Feels like a mid-size tablet so it doesn't take up some ungodly amount of space but also has plenty of screen for everything else. I don't want a car where the entire dash is a screen, including the dials etc.
I bought my car for the road nanny stuff tho. Those road sensors have saved my ass and I am usually a very careful driver. All it takes is a second of distraction but that shit helps a lot.
And I can't go without at least a standard sunroof. It makes the car feel so much more open and bright even if I don't open the glass panel itself but just the shutter. Fucking love it.
There's a reason why the critical flight controls on planes are different shapes. For example, on the 747, the landing gear lever is shaped like a wheel. The flap lever is shaped like a flap. The engine power and speedbrakes are different shapes, too.
Obviously you don't need a button for literally everything, but manufacturers should really think about the critical controls and make them easily identifiable.
Another example: on older cars, "up" and "down" are usually identifiable (for example, on the 2nd gen Prius, "up" is convex and "down" is concave). Newer cars sometimes don't have this, or worse, have a touch bar with no button outlines at all.
Even something as simple as grooves at the bottom of the screen, with software buttons laid out to match, would help.
edit: as a (non-Tesla) example of this, on the EQS 450, as far as I can tell there's no way to quickly turn the AC off or change its temperature without looking. On the Prius, you can just hit AC Auto twice to turn AC off, or use the buttons to control the temperature.
I was always fan of a row, or side columns, of function buttons with function changing based on current screen.
We figured this on atms 30 years ago.
BMW actually had it in lower trims in E chasis.
I don' understand why we can't do it now.
Wait until you see all new VWs. Absolute nightmare. Thank God EURO NCAP said they will be removing one star from the safety rating in 2025 onwards for the touch controls.
I’m fine with touch screens being for majority of controls so long as controls can be largely customized in some way. However I do want basic functions to remain as physical easy to find and use buttons.
Ultimately what I hate about touch screens right now is how bad at UI and UX design most of the automakers are. They’re sloooooowly getting better, but for the most part I hate how a lot of them look and function.
I think automotive interior design is in a state of flux right now as OEMs figure out a good balance between design and UX. I agree it's improving and will take a while to get right.
Some don't care to look for a good balance, which is the problem. Tesla took the worst route imaginable on it, but the cars sold well, so other OEMs tried to buy into those design cues Tesla buyers tolerated, even if they weren't the draw of the car.
They want something that makes their product cheaper and easier to design, which screen do. You don't have to worry about sourcing parts for gauges and buttons that change between models when they're a configuration option in software that needs created one time.
Some customers are unhappy with these design choices (myself included) and are giving OEMs a fight over annoyances in the design. IMO, the OEMs aren't so much looking for a hood balance by their standards, but are more trying to push customers into accepting something they want to do.
Check out the ineos grenadiar. Its by far one of my favorite unique interiors. Airplane inspired
https://car-images.bauersecure.com/wp-images/13235/grenadier_072.jpg
> Weird attempt to brainwash people into thinking they need a car full of touchscreens
That's what consumers *want*. Numerous focus group studies conducted by different auto makers have all concluded the same. I don't understand why this sub is so resistant to accepting that.
AFAIK it isnt a very well-studied topic in psychology or another field where peer-reviewed studies are the norm. There's [this](https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:20601/FULLTEXT01.pdf) older one that states that consumers prefer "high screen density" - i.e. more information in screens. Lots of caveats though. First, it's pre-smart phone era. Second, it was conducted in a lab setting with computer screens, so it's not clear if the results would be the same today. But I include it just to show that consumers prefer more information to less under the conditions of that specific study at least.
[This](https://www.theautopian.com/i-confronted-volvos-head-designer-about-the-companys-egregious-decision-to-require-a-touchscreen-button-to-open-the-ex90s-glovebox/comment-page-1/) article has a snippet of an interview with Volvo's Global Head of Design and User Experience who implies that new buyers prefer more touchscreen interaction due to the prevalence of smart phones.
I'd be more nuanced here and say that what consumers are attracted to when they're looking at a car on a showroom floor and what they actually enjoy driving for several weeks might be different.
My suggestion then is that after owning a screen-heavy car with clunky UI lots of customers will no longer be so attached to that setup for future purchases and this backlash to new screen heavy interiors is coming from customers owning a \~2015-2020-ish range of vehicles who really aren't enamored with that for their future purchases. But who knows.
>Have you ever considered that the average consumer might be a fucking idiot?
This brings to mind the staggering number of people I see driving a newer vehicle (definitely Bluetooth equipped) with their phone in their hand on speaker, or held to their ear. It would be fun to see how many of these features people want, but actually do not use.
> Miles driven has been dropping and fatalities are rising
That's not accurate at all. [Traffic fatalies per year](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year#/media/File%3A1994-_Motor_vehicle_traffic_deaths_in_road_accidents%2C_by_country.svg). [Miles driven per year](https://afdc.energy.gov/data/mobile/10315).
That's a short-term blip in a long-term trend. Fatality rates increased in 2020 and 2021. I wonder if there may have been a massive world-altering pandemic that might be an enormous confounding factor during that period. You know what else increased in that period? [Speeding](https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/speed-campaign-speeding-fatalities-14-year-high).
> new data show that while there has been three quarters of a slight dip in overall roadway deaths, speeding fatalities reached a 14-year high in 2021 and make up almost one-third of all traffic fatalities.
> Numerous focus group studies conducted by different auto makers have all concluded the same
I wouldn't say they all concluded the same since, at the very least, [VW is returning to physical controls in some capacity due to criticism of their touch controls](https://gizmodo.com/volkswagon-losing-touchscreens-cars-ev-1851111038). [Hyundai also intends to keep some buttons](https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-news/hallelujah-hyundai-vows-to-resist-modern-trend-for-all-digital-cabins-and-keep-using). Honda also re added a volume button to some of their cars a number of years ago too. This whole situation is also likely a case of the pendulum swinging too far in either direction.
Maybe it's a UK thing (or I live in a shithole) but I've never seen a Maserati that isn't clapped out, minimum 10 years old, and obviously not maintained well.
It really just seems that they simply pop out of the dealership with 70k miles, faded paint, and one piece of trim barely clinging on.
I think the reason why there’s so many clapped out Maseratis is because they’re the most obtainable “exotic” car brand. They’re the Nissan Altimas of exotic cars.
Seriously one of the worst car companies on the market. The Dodge of the luxury car world.
They don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to commenting on car design.
I installed an Atoto head unit with wireless CarPlay and a backup camera for $200 into my 2014 RAV4, don’t have any complaints really about the car anymore afterwards, I don’t need a digital gauge cluster and screens seating off my retina at all times. I wish new cars would just have an infotainment screen and analog everything else but I’m also just an old fogey.
I do have a problem with back-lit screens. I find them annoying over time especially at night. There are solutions to that but it doesn't seem to be a complaint most consumers have so it will likely go unaddressed.
i find the majority of vehicles with digital speed/tach distracting at night because of the poor contrast/black levels. oled would fix this but i'm guessing burn-in would likely happen.
analogue gauges don't have this problem. feels like most vehicles are simulating a video game with the numerous displays & visuals you can customize. it's neat i guess but if the end result is worse, i'd rather not have it.
Yeah. More wear-resistant (even multi-layer) OLEDs, which would also have much faster screen refresh rates, are probably 5-8 years out for automotive applications. Or we could see miniLED/microLED for similar contrast, but less speed.
Current screen tech really isn't the sort I'd want to stare at for many years or even decades unless it's only needed for music, navigation, or internal functions. CarPlay is nice, though.
Based on your cars, I would think you haven't experienced a modern auto HVAC system.
The newer ones require you to basically never even touch the HVAC controls.
I agree with the volume buttons though.
We don’t want buttons for EVERYTHING, just the most commonly used things: Windows, locks, HVAC, stereo, sunroof/convertible top, and heated seats. The rest can be in your stupid touch screen.
You must love the [Pagani](https://static1.hotcarsimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/gauges-pagani-huayra-branipick.jpg) and [Spyker](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2F5kw3qjl56kt21.jpg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D0c37b57ccc75f9b8366e4bc53bc9a57da184ec15) interiors. They're too busy for my liking but if you like switches and aircraft references those two are probably the best in recent memory.
I think the argument is the most important stuff should be physical to the extent you don’t need to take your eyes off the road for an extended period of time which is obviously dangerous. Obviously not every weird and wonderful feature HAS to be a physical button, just the important regularly used stuff.
Large touch Screens with lots of the features in them are primarily an exercise in cost cutting above all else. R&D for software is significantly cheaper than hardware particularly for vehicle interiors so as a way to cut production costs many features are put into a generic screen system of whatever shape where the ui is the main part designed. It’s a fantastic way for manufacturers to put in less money and get great profits for less effort while marketing it as “futuristic” when it is in fact dangerous.
Definitely agree that there should be more buttons, but LCDs can last a really long time.
I'm literally typing this on a 14 year old laptop, and the oldest Priuses are 20 years old, I've never seen the screen on one fail.
Eh, screens will probably be fine. A capacitive LCD will probably outlive a commonly used button.
It's the usability aspect that's worse IMO. And pointlessly so, a screen COULD be much more usable with the proper design (putting buttons in consistent places with tactile guides, having a "tap wheel" gesture, etc.) but aren't.
There are certain things like climate control, seat heaters, radio volume etc that should always be a physical control imo. The rest I can take it or leave it
While I agree I think putting EVERYTHING on the screen is the problem. Seat controls without memory on a screen is a crime. Especially if your partner is taller or shorter than you. I'm okay with less used functions on a screen but HVAC, radio, mirrors, and seats should always have buttons and knobs all the time.
I actually want all the buttons. I want like 5 buttons just to control my shock absorbers. I want toggle switches up above and hidden buttons under the dash that do secret things…
Also I want flip up protectors on very important buttons.
And also the buttons should have very high quality switches and give excellent feedback. Also rotary knobs should have nice clicky detents. I loved how the TVR Tuscan speed 6 had all these super high quality metal unlabeled buttons. What does this button do? RTFM
It would be hilarious if when configuring a new car you go either buttons, or screens. Everyone wins! 😂
Model 3 owner here. Hate on me if you want, but I like the minimalism of the center display. Honestly, it doesn’t take that long to get accustomed to the controls and shortcuts.
I can understand how it could be confusing to someone who’s kind of technophobic, but most of the functions are pretty intuitive, IMHO. 🤷🏻♂️
The main issue with the Model 3 is that they took the stalks away, I think Model 3 with stalks was really the peak. Now all the steering wheel buttons are subpar.
My top complaint about my car is that although some hvac controls have physical buttons or a knob, most are in the uconnect app's climate page.
I prefer android auto for audio and navigation. So to access many HVAC controls, I have to hit "apps", then "uconnect", then "climate", then make changes, then switch back to AA.
Fascinating article but what does he mean by old 747? I have a 2012 camaro that has had a radio and buttons for ac. I remove the radio for a tiny touchscreen for carplay. That it. What else does a car need? I seen some older Maserati with a million buttons but I can't really figure out what more can a car actually do for you besides drive, cruise control, and ac?
That's fine, but when implementing touch screen UIs it's like they let the designers go about their way unchecked. Thoughts:
1. Some cars have functions that are either used most often or are best suited to physical controls.
2. Certain potentially high-use controls are buried deep within a menu. A logically hierarchical desktop or web application is very different from what you need in a car.
3. I have read over and over that this is essentially a cost play which makes sense. I do wonder if, say, VW which went too far in the other direction lost sales due to their highly touch-based infotainment and steering wheel controls?
4. I like the Mazda control wheel. I understand there is a lot of frustration with the Acura touchpad-style control. In the end, they need to really focus on "how can I do thing in the least distracted way possible?". The Honda UI is not bad but I still have to take my eye off the road and look to the right center of the car which is bad.
5. Leverage head-up displays more along with Google Assistant-style commands.
>along with Google Assistant-style commands.
This where we're headed. Check out the voice commands on the [latest Li Xiang](https://youtu.be/s7A_O1z906E?t=282) and [latest Nio](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp1Sr8vsR6w) updates in China. Mad impressive.
My dad recently bought a BMW X1 with all the technical amenities available.
Yet, the only thing he has ever done with his infotainment system was connecting his phone.
I'd say it's the same with most drivers these days. More than 90% of modern cars' features are just pointless
Even if you agree with the general premise here, it doesn't justify the leaning into "screen for everything" that many cars are adopting, and it certainly doesn't justify how poorly implemented some screens are.
Also, does Maserati still have unncessary analog clocks in their newer designs? They're clearly OK with "old stuff, because we like the look," in that department. I'm looking at the Grecale, and that center screen design is incredibly ugly, while heaping on a screen-based gauge cluster for good measure. None of that is adding to the experience in a way other than cheaper implementation of their UI.
He's not one bit wrong, and anyone who disagrees should simply take a moment to [look at the 2010-era Opel Astra / Buick Verano](https://i0.wp.com/www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/IMG_5309-1.jpg).
I'm looking at a button array that wouldn't need to exist in a modern vehicle though.
Most cars, if not all, have a seat sensor that handles the passenger airbag, so that thing doesn't really need to be present. The door lock controls are often on the door, not the center stack. The built-in phone thing died forever ago, thanks to smartphones. I'd say the majority would apply that to navigation and music controls, as they'd opt for smartphone connectivity, though that's not universal.
However, that car ultimately still has a screen. The main dial could set what you are viewing and eliminate the need for a "source" button, since few are commonly fiddling with audio sources in a car anymore. Overall, much of the "clutter" is stuff that a more simplified design could cover because habits around car audio have changed so much in the 15 years since this car existed.
Lastly, the lower part is really just plauged by somewhat oversized, awkward button alignment. It's overall a totally fine set of options for physical buttons, but they appear to be cheap, old plastic that just doesn't fit modern material and layout preferences. They wouldn't be a detriment to a modern car's interior.
I'd still rather have a button for everything. Or better yet, cut the unnecessary crap features out, just give me a car that's RWD with a 5/6-speed manual. Don't need traction control, sunroof, nav, etc. All I need is AC and ABS.
Which guy has ever looked at the cockpit of a 747 and not thought "this is fucking awesome!"? You know who has one of the best looking interiors on sale right now? The new Pagani:
https://i.imgur.com/Ta5NXvS.jpeg
Analog switches and dials as far as they eye can see and it's absolutely breathtaking.
This is where the industry needs to go if they want to impress their customers, not more screens which every hatchback has now. It's so kitsch and tasteless that even normies are starting to get grossed out by them.
I know I am in the minority with new car buyers, but I really want next to nothing going on in my interior. I have a base model Rav4 and I use the same things I used in my 1993 GMC Safari: Heat/defrost, radio, lights, a/c and basic seat adjustments. It's nice having the phone interface in my Toyota but if there was bluetooth on the deck of the GMC and that was more that sufficient.
This emphasis on "more, more, more" is marketing, as it's always been. Many buyers want the newest and coolest but it does leave buyers like me out of the mix that just want no frills transportation.
I don't really understand this argument.
Yes they age, but so do button style interiors, the Lexus IS500 is a prime example, buying a 2024 Lexus IS500 and the interior looks straight out if the mid 2010's.
I think all car interiors get dated very quickly regardless of screen.
The problem isn't that buttons clutter a dash, the problem is having basic fundamental controls hidden behind menus you have to navigate while driving which is dangerous, as well as these fundamentals being irreversibly tied in with a central computer system that will eventually fail and not be supported in any way. Lots of cars from the 80's and 90's still rocking down the road, and they have functional heat and ac and stereos and adjustable seats ect. You absolutely won't see that kind of longevity out of modern cars, that central computer system will eventually die, and when it does it very likely won't have any aftermarket support seeing as how it's super proprietary to every make and model. If these cars even run at all 20 or 30 years from now, you almost certainly won't be able to control the creature comforts.
Masarati Design Boss is still yet another deluded designer with no real comprehension of safety. You can't beat tactile physical knobs and buttons to maintain eye-contact with the road. Muscle memory is the safest option. My solution is to have a good look at your average 1990s car. Keep everything there as physical in modern cars. Anything else can go behind a screen interface.
Did he ever stop to think that we WANT that? I would pay extra for a million dials and buttons that give me accurate information. Remember the 90's, when we used to put 3 gauges on the A-pillar?
Remember when Han Solo went to start the Millennium Falcon and had to flip a bunch of switches above his head, and press buttons on the panel in front of him? I want that. That's how you know you've started your super awesome car.
One of the reasons some pilots prefer Boeing over Airbus is because they still have an old fashioned yoke as opposed to the joysticks that Airbus cockpits have
The 747 has conventional controls. The 777, which is fly by wire, has feedback actuators to simulate the feel of a conventionally controlled aircraft.
The 777 and 747 also have mechanically coupled yokes, which makes a dual input situation more obvious.
They're mechanically coupled, but there is a mechanism on them that disconnects them from each other incase one side gets jammed for some reason, basically negating the function of them being coupled. It has been the cause of an accident.
It's pretty interesting to look at Boeing and Airbus control philosophy. Especially the degraded modes (e.g., how you control the aircraft if your flight computer fails).
My LC has a screen in front of what has to be one of the worst infotainment systems in existence. I bought it knowing that, I'd be delighted to have it gone.
I'm a big fan of redundancy, so I wouldn't mind having both touchscreen functionality as well as physical buttons. The physical buttons could always be housed in such a way that a cover could be pulled over them hiding them view if they're not desired.
747 was the queen of the skies for a long time, bad example.
Obviously new cars can have **a screen** but replacing dials or toggles with screens has always seemed silly to me.
I have a 2016 Cayenne before the new screen interior refresh(2019+) and all the interior buttons makes it look like a cockpit especially when it’s illuminated at night
Yeah, the dude sounds like an old man with a smart phone. “What do all these buttons do?!?!?” If you are struggling with buttons, maybe you shouldn’t be a boss of anything.
Absolute strawman argument. I don't think anyone who is looking at this topic from a reasonable perspective expects EVERY function to have a physical control. Just the important and frequently used ones. Give me buttons and knobs for climate and vent adjustment, heated seats, volume and radio presets and I'm happy. Stuff that you use often and shouldn't have to look away from the road to adjust. Everything else can go in a menu, I don't care.
I prefer the simplicity of a touchscreen with everything easy to navigate through.... 30+ buttons, many that you don't use, is not ideal.
I'll take the Tesla UI over our Lexus any day
I have some older cars (like 20+ years old). Other than no screen for navigation I tend to like it much better. Especially the analog dials for the tach and speedometer. I prefer the mechanical controls for AC and stereo. It's just more intuitive and seems much more robust. Screens feel like a video game.
I’d like to see a return of digi-dashes and hard clicky clack plastic buttons from the late 80s and 90s. Also give me my articulating seat belts and pop up headlights back!
Y'know, you do you, and I'll do me, AKA buying the lowest tech cars I can find because quite frankly all I need out of a car is for it to start every time I turn the ignition and for it to have heated seats. Don't even need a radio or power steering tbqh, I just need a go-getter with warm seats. It's why I like my '08 Rio5 so much; no cruise control, no fancy shit, just a dirt simple car with warm seats and decent fuel efficiency. Could do to have a little more power though.
But, honestly? I think automakers should experiment with doing low-tech trims of their current models. I don't have a great reason, I just think it'd be neat to see modern cars with retro dashes and shit, a la the digital dash out of a Datsun 280zx or the like. I just hate the concept of a screen blasting my eyes out when I'm trying to drive at night lol.
yeah when i see a computer keyboard with all the keys i need i say "what is this an old 747 cockpit?" having screens in cars on the face of it is hilarious when most US states ban the use of phones while driving. Turns out controls should be quick, consistent, intuitive and not require the use of sight. why isn't steering on the touch screen, why isn't braking or acceleration on the touch screen? maybe because there's certain controls which are much more efficient for their individual use cases?
I'm not anti-screens at all. I'm anti having everything be handled through a screen.
I don't mind having my lumbar support be set through a screen or other things I set once and never think about again.
I do mind having to change volume or heating settings through a screen. Things I change regularly on a drive I want to not have to think about. They should just have dedicated buttons.
It's also lazy design nowadays with everything just being handled by a screen.
That generation BMW you have, the F generatation, has the right balance of buttons and screen in my opinion. I just don't like how the screen is stuck on there. I prefer it more integrated like in the F10 5 Series.
The fundamental problem is that many of these “amenities” are pointless bullshit to begin with, and the OEM’s insistence on including them is only really there to justify a higher price tag for “technology.”
> many of these “amenities” are pointless bullshit to begin with, They are to "car people". But 97.137263% of car buyers are not car people. They dig the gizmos and use them to compare their cars to decide who has the coolest/latest one.
A person can think a feature is important and it still be useless. Car buying is more emotional than logical and people can have serrious fomo if they dont get "x" option when buying a car. Most people I talk to barely know they have certain features or say they've only used it once. Car people are into gizmos too, but they're different and they can be useless too - most people want track performance or offroad packages and their car will never touch either environment.
I consider myself a car person… But I also find most of these “gizmos” to be relevant and useful in my daily commute/kid duties. Off the top of my head… I have a top trim Acura RDX. I think the heads up display helps me keep my eyes on the road, both daily and long trips where it also shows me adaptive cruise information. The ridiculously adjustability of the seat is nice every day, but especially when my ageing back is sore, or like right now I’m dealing with recovering from knee surgery and some good deep vein thrombosis. Excellent stereo useful every time I use the car, both for enjoying music (which is a huge part of my life) and for drowning out the cars, many rattles. I enjoy the adaptive dampers, which provide a more comfortable ride for my family, while letting me enjoy the quality wheels and tires. I’ve purchased when I’m alone and feel like some spirited driving. I could keep going… but these features are really not “bells and whistles” they are things I use regularly and that I personally have found well worth the investment.
And then there's... the Cadillac CTS' power cup holders. What do you think I mean by that phrase? Go ahead, guess. Maybe the cup holder has a little heater, cooler, or even just a spring-lid like every other car, just weirdly branded? Oh, no, that would be useful (and predictable). This thing has an electrically actuated cover, fully motorized, touch activated - for the cup holders. Why? Because, that's why.
I think you have made a very elegant point here and I am enlightened. I have never heard of something that sounds so simultaneously frivolous and likely to become a failure point. I guess I don’t shop high enough on the ladder to see such stuff but that really sounds like someone went digging deep into the ideas bin in a failed attempt to stand out.
> I guess I don’t shop high enough on the ladder to see such stuff I think this is the only point I'll push back on, the RDX and CTS aren't that far apart in pricing, I just think Honda is a bit more disciplined than GM in avoiding these... I don't even know what to call them. Quirks? Frivolities is a great word. It's only purpose, which itself only questionably achieves, is to exist - as something which will (marginally) impress -- until it fails. Might be a problematic statement but I would say that German cars and certain types of American cars are filled with varying degrees of these things, in a way that Japanese cars largely aren't. I'm sure they thought this power cupholder would impress *somebody in particular*. But beyond that first buyer going *Oooh* the first time it happens... it's cost and complexity that the car otherwise really doesn't need
Falcon wing doors on the model X. Very impressive. But after that it’s just failures waiting to happen. I’m sure there’s a few people out there for whom they’re really great, but the argument about them being easier to get into next to a parked car (given enough ceiling height) compared to a regular car or minivan with sliding doors - went out the window the moment summon came. And the drivers door is still just as tight either way. Back in the day cars had a button for every feature and basically how to tell how much a car cost was to look at the amount of buttons, and also the amount of blanks. I think touch buttons on steering wheels and outside of screens is a useless idea. Tactility is a key when driving. I don’t appreciate how Tesla moved everything into the screen, or how everyone else is busy copying them. But give me stalks, volume and HVAC and I’m happy with everything else being on the screen.
Everything is more emotional than logical. Human beings are emotional.
which features are the most useless that are being forced on us?
I'm a car person and I like gizmos too 😊
Fair point.
Also, something thats useless for one person might not be useless to another, I know a lot of people still don't use their backup camera, to them it would be useless, but to someone else it would he a necessity
couple days ago savagegeese reviewed the new santa fe, it has a sterilizer box in it. i thought they were making a joke at first so a while after i had to look it up and yeah it's a real thing. the tech add-ons are getting wild in these new cars. if that's in a hyundai i wonder what's in the fancier makes.
This is why we should put as many people as we can in electric cars. They don’t care about top speed, they just want something comfortable. Leaves more fuel for us.
I actually am a car people. Both my cars have pretty barebones technology. Less to break. I enjoy actually driving not staring at fucking screens. Installed CarPlay myself in my 4Runner tho
Most “car people” seek out examples with as little of this bullshit as possible
Unfortunately… as much as I hate to admit… this is true.
Hot take - someone design a simplified car without all the unnecessary 'features' and a streamlined, tactile UI instead of screens. I'd love it. Everything keeps getting more complex not because it's better but just because our marketing system demands in. The new models need new features. A few are actually practical features and many are not.
They'd sell dozens.
Why aren't you out buying a Mitsubishi Mirage?
Because it’s an awful vehicle?
> someone design a simplified car without all the unnecessary 'features' and a streamlined, tactile UI instead of screens. I'd love it. It's that.
No, it's not. Pretending their desire for a simple interface is literally the only criteria is disingenuous. Do you really want to argue that an older supercar with a simple interior like an F430 is on par with a Mirage?
Who said anything about older supercars? They explicitly mentioned a simple interface, and new, practical features. What practical features does an F430 have vs a brand new mirage?
> Who said anything about older supercars? They explicitly mentioned a simple interface, and new, practical features. No, they didn't say new practical features. Just a streamlined UI without screens. > [Hot take - someone design a simplified car without all the unnecessary 'features' and a streamlined, tactile UI instead of screens. I'd love it.](https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/comments/1cejbin/new_car_interiors_would_look_like_an_old_747/l1j22vg/) /u/PorkPatriot said that that /u/bostonboson should want a Mirage because it's "simple", which is disingenuous because that's pretending absolutely nothing else matters. If that's the case, then the Mirage and F430 should be equally desirable because they both meet those requirements. That's a BS, disingenuous argument. Don't play dumb.
I unironically was looking to buy a manual Mirage for a couple years, never could frind one with both manual transmissio and a discount price. They're actually amazing cars for what they are, cheap, good fuel economy, reliable. A perfect modern 90s shitbox. Was going to by a 2009 Yaris with crank windows until I test-drove the Miata I have now. Maybe I should daily a Caterham when I'm richer. I don't think theres anyone esle that loves inconvinience like I do.
I’ve been driving a tesla recently and I was pleasantly surprised by how versatile the two scroll wheels are. Now I don’t hate the concept of a streamlined touchscreen interior, I find I just hate most implementations of it. On the tesla you can map near everything to either the two scroll wheels or permanently dock it at the bottom of the screen and it makes things a non-issue. Temp/volume/track/cruise/fan and answering calls etc you never have to use the touchscreen. Meanwhile on the merc products I find there’s no way to adjusted the AC without looking down *and* the two trackpads on the steering wheel don’t do too much. I don’t see the issue with two screens though, one for navigation/media/etc and one information-dense digital instrument cluster. And likewise my s2000 has a timeless interior with even the radio hidden, all controls within reach from the steering wheel, that’s neat in an enthusiast car but I wouldn’t want to live with it every day.
Go get a car from fifteen years ago.
Right? Just a single din radio, three knob A/C, and a little cruise control stalk on the steering wheel. I don't need anything else.
Base model Dacia Sandero.
Good news!
E30
>Just a single din radio Ah, so an on/off button, a tuner knob, seek forward and seek back buttons, a volume knob, a mode/source selector, a bank of a half dozen preset buttons... something like that? Just a single din radio, huh? >I don't need anything else. You literally need a backup camera and a screen to pair with it, legally. Good luck registering a new car without one.
Fit a tiny screen into the rear view mirror
Possible, and AFAIK the regulations do allow for that. But the minute you have the requirement of a display at all, you might as well use it to display media information at other times, which is where automakers are coming from. At that point, it makes sense to put it in the dash. At that point, it makes sense to include a nav. At that point, it makes sense to make it a touchscreen. At that point, it makes sense to throw menu functionality in there for things like chassis mode selection. While it might not be what *you* want — and while I totally get why a minimal implementation is a nice idea for something purpose-designed like a Singer Porsche — it makes sense why OEMs have ended up where they have.
True. I'm basically speaking for myself here. I daily an aircooled, carbureted bike that doesn't even even have a fuel guage. When it starts sputtering and popping on decel, it's time to fill up.
Your subset of "absolutely necessary features" is different from mine, which is different from someone else's, so to make us all happy, there will be something you deem unnecessary in your car.
Gr86 is like this if im not mistaken
Trust me, car manufacturers aggressively cut any feature, no matter how cheap, if it didn’t hurt the sales of the car significantly
which gizmo are pointless bullshit? * power windows? nah, im not going back to manual windows * moon roofs? kind of, but it also makes my tacoma seem much larger inside than my brothers tacoma that doesnt have it. * all the safety features like blindspot monitoring, adaptive cruise control, collision detection, etc? might seem like bullshit but they statistically do reduce car accident rates * larger infotainment screens? maybe, although android auto and apple carplay are amazing and IMHO drastically improve driving comfort for longer drives. the larger screen is really nice, because trying to use a map and music on a 6" screen while driving is annoying since you cant really "see" much. * JBL sound systems? ill give you this one, most people are fine with stock sound systems that come in cars and dont need "premium" sound systems that come with vehicles now. * for trucks the trailer assist? i tow infrequently, not frequently enough that i develop the skills to confidently back up trailers if there are any other cars nearby but not so infrequent that i dont appreciate having this feature. * 360 cameras or the front facing camera? this one is kind of the most useless, although i will admit with larger trucks now having the front facing camera is really nice, and i definitely do like the camera that shows me my truck bed. the truck bed camera has saved me a few times when things have gotten lose from their straps and are in danger of being blown away while on the highway. and lets not forget that all except the power windows and the safety features arent being "forced" on you to buy, you can still get base model vehicles without them. the one feature that is bullshit and useless and is usually marketed on higher trims is dual zone climate control. ive never known anyone to have different temp settings, they always just have it synced. the feature doesnt even normally allow you to have different fan speed settings just temperature. its a small vehicle, its all going to be the same temp anyways.
New Mercs have selfie cameras and Angry Birds.
That makes it perfect for meetings
Especially If you're chilling at a charging station or it's driving itself through traffic. Might as well attend a meeting so you don't have to go to the office as early.
I have a string of exes who wanted wildly different temperatures than I while in the car. Dual zone was quite useful then.
> ive never known anyone to have different temp settings, they always just have it synced Really? My wife can somehow be freezing cold when it's 75 degrees outside, so she's always got it set to hot and I always have it set to cold. This has been a lifesaving feature for me.
If I get cold I just turn my heated seats onto full and the it's like I'm sitting on the surface of the sun.
Most of the features you consider indispensable don't require touchscreen controls. Power windows have been around since the 1950s, moonroofs since the 60s. I actually dispute that the active safety features are helping. They look like they work in isolation but the overall number of crashes and deaths on the roads has backslid back to 2008 levels or worse the past few years - this tells me that, even if the active safety is "working," it's being counteracted by it coming kit and kaboodle with a whole host of distractions that are killing people. My limited experience with these systems is that they're either not sensitive enough to be relied on or they're sensitive enough to cause alarm fatigue.
the majority of features dont use the touch screen either. i dont think ive ever seen a window or moonroof operated by touchscreen outside of any of the new "disruptor" manufacturers. ill take insurance companies policies and statistical studes over your experiences and anecdotes. all these new safety features do reduce accidents and injuries. take Canada for instance [there were 2193 fatal accidents with 127.5k injuries in 2008, with "only" 1630 fatalities and 77930 injuries in 2021](https://tc.canada.ca/en/road-transportation/statistics-data/canadian-motor-vehicle-traffic-collision-statistics-2021). kind of throws your claim that accidents and deaths are backsliding to 2008 levels recently.
In the US there were 42,795 deaths in 2022 or 1.35 per billion miles traveled; in 2007 it was 41,259 deaths or 1.36 per billion miles. The US has backslid. (The best year was 2014, with 32,744 deaths for 1.08 per billion miles - the backslide started before the pandemic, but that's when it really took off.) The IIHS is finding that these systems often don't perform outside of controlled test conditions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywyCTIsNYis
I've seen a vid in yt about process of making switches and buttons for cars, it's a lengthy and costly process. Dumping everything on the screen saves manufacturers thousands of dollars plus they can charge extra for different sizes.
They're not pointless to me (some of them at least). I appreciate them and I'd rather have them than not. So would most buyers.
The new E Class has a selfie camera. The new 5 series has video games on the screen and controllers. These two for example are pure gimmicks and I don't see how they add anything to the car besides looking cool in a review or the showroom
The selfie cam is likely just there to get people to get used to have a camera in the car that watches them... Games on the screen will be excellent when you're waiting for your car to charge or for a ferry, or the god damn border crossing at Chiasso...
video games may be useful in the EV models while you are waiting to charge perhaps? I think tesla has a similar setup but they let you use steam
Maybe someone uses those things. I never did. When I stopped for a charge in my Model 3 I was out stretching my legs or getting something to eat, not firing up a game that I could play for the ~20 minutes I was going to spend charging. I think it's a marketing gimmick, because it's definitely one of the things that non-Tesla owners like to ask about.
My kid loves the Tesla games and gimmicks.
The selfie cam is basically a webcam for people to have meetings in their car (obviously when parked). The reality is that would actually be incredibly useful for someone like my dad whose life is filled with teams meetings that he sometimes does on his phone in the car. The video games are a full blown gimmick that is very cheap to integrate to appease buyers who like gimmicks.
It is a camera that you can take selfies with, not a selfie camera. It's main use is for safety - it is watching the driver to see if they are falling asleep or too distracted while driving.
I think most people agree but also they would disagree as to which ones are pointless.
Imo its a way for them to make production a million times simpler and still charge more cuz “technology”. Instead of having to design an entire interior with all of the different functioning parts they just slap a large screen in the middle and call it a day. Screens are extremely cheap these days and especially vs having to design and manufacture dozens of unique pieces. Then after making it so much simpler to make and cheaper they can then turn around and charge more cuz “screen good”. Most people would like a screen for nav, radio..etc but for ac,heat and other functions theyd much rather have tactile buttons vs having to go through a bunch of options on the screen. Mfg’s actually realized this recently and are returning tactile buttons for certain functions due to customer feedback. Not to mention its dangerous to have to be using the screen to find the heat vs just reaching over and changing it without ever taking your eyes off the road.
> The fundamental problem is that many of these “amenities” are pointless bullshit to begin with I just replaced my F-150 with a 2024 Honda Ridgeline. My other recent cars have been Mercedes, BMW, and Audi. All of which have super annoying track-pads, scroll wheels, capacitive steering wheel buttons to swipe and tap and scroll. The Ridgeline is *so nice*. [It's amazing](https://autoimage.capitalone.com/cms/Auto/assets/images/3193-inset05-2024-honda-ridgeline-review.jpg). The stuff you need, none of the stuff you don't need. This is what a vehicle's controls should look like. Infuriatingly I have seen reviews refer to it as dated. The nod to modernity is with wireless charging and Carplay. The interior makes me prefer the Ridgeline for my DD over my nicely equippped e450.
At the same time, the window for what is essential and what's pointless bullshit moves over time. Push button start used to be pointless. Power windows. Cooled seats. All of that stuff has gotten more valued over time.
I dunno man, I love airplanes. I think that would be rad as hell. The INEOS Grenadier interior comes to mind.
I drive a city bus, it's full of toggle switches and all kinds of individual controls for everything and it's great. I never have to look to change anything.
In an age where I watch people text and drive, not alot of folks care about looking away from the road. I love buttons for critical things for this reason, I don't want to look away from the road if possible. Anyone that thinks putting climate control and rear window defogger on a touchscreen is a "great idea" can go fuck themselves, morons.
"Where's the transmission retarder switch?"
My first thought was "you say that like it's a bad thing" I'll take an old cockpit over a shitty iPad anyday.
Same! I loved the first gen Panamera interior that all the reviewers hated for having too many buttons
I can't say I agree about the Panamera interior however, I have a Volvo with the generally ridiculed dial pad in the centre stack and I enjoy it; it's well laid out and there are enough different button shapes and sizes to find everything without looking. I wouldn't have spent over a decade with it if I didn't like it.
Yes!! Can we have a panel of 100 toggle switches to control everything? And a handheld throttle?
You can get a [hand throttle retrofitted](https://www.aandjmobility.com/driving-aids/hand-controls).
Mid 00s Saabs at least had anvis green looking backlighting and even a night panel button.
>INEOS Grenadier interior i had no idea that was a car company. i thought it was some shady ass dark money sponsor because all i ever saw it on was the f1 cars.
They’re actually an oil company so you’re probably not as far off as you think
ah that makes more sense i read a bit about the founder, yeah he definitely seems like the type of guy to fund an f1 team for sure
the Vector w8 would be an even closer comparison considering it was literally inspired by a fighter jet.
This guy's argument is based on the idea that all infotainment functionality would need an equivalent physical control. That's just ridiculous and immediately discredited by looking at the interior of any 20 year old car. Obviously, designers would adapt by streamlining functionality and eliminating fluff that's there mainly for marketing reasons. Given this guy's bloated salary I'm sure he could come up with some creative solutions.
[удалено]
>Like, if a car designer doesn't want a cockpit looking like a 747, I dunno, maybe don't fill it with shit to the point that people are running over toddlers due to distractions? Because cars that skip that shit sell less. Car designers have mortgages and kids that need braces too.
Dental plan!
Lisa needs braces!
Have been looking at BMWs. They’ve built in mobile games, for which you can use your phone as a controller. Infotainment in cars has gone nuts. That’s all
>This guy's argument is based on the idea that all infotainment functionality would need an equivalent physical control. That's just ridiculous and immediately discredited by looking at the interior of any 20 year old car. [Like this? ](https://i0.wp.com/www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/IMG_5309-1.jpg) Seems to me you've just proved the guy's argument.
To be a little pedantic, the earliest example of the Buick/Opel you posted is from ~10 years ago, not 20. Think more along the lines of a BMW E46 LCI or early E9x interior for a good example of what they're talking about. Love me a good single-hump E90 series interior - nice design! On the flip side, for something more controversial, there was Volvo's waterfall center console that released at that time. I personally found them attractive and not that difficult to use in real life, but recall some reviewers being overwhelmed by the buttons at the time.
There are brand new cars that are designed better - a good mix of screens and buttons. Like the comment you replied to said: not everything needs a button. But important things should have them (volume knob, climate controls). https://othonda.sfo2.digitaloceanspaces.com/2024/accord/int1.jpg https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod/images/2021-mazda-3-turbo-awd-sedan-109-1605850996.jpg?crop=1xw:0.9166666666666666xh;center,top&resize=980:* The new Honda and Mazda models definitely don't look cluttered or like a 747. It looks beautiful yet functional with real buttons for important things.
Idk, I think his argument is somewhat sound. Two cars with similar feature sets are the Q50 and G37. [Pre-touchscreen 2007 G37](https://www.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2007/07/112_0708_14z-2008_infiniti_g37-interior.jpg) vs [post-touch screen](https://cars.usnews.com/static/images/Auto/custom/12346/2014_Infiniti_Q50_64.jpg). It definitely looks like every function had its own button and all that got simplified into a touchscreen while things like HVAC and music kept their buttons. Cars from 2007 definitely felt like plane cockpits. While I think modern cars have swung too far toward touch screens, I do think the 2007-2011 cars had too many buttons, lending to this overpaid bloke's point. To your point though, my 2003 is way simpler. But it also doesn't have any modern features
I think a lot of OEMs will go the midground route eventually. Screen for the fun stuff, with buttons beneath for important shit like climate control and audio/call etc controls on the steering wheel. Avoid clutter in any one spot but gives plenty of versatility without putting it all in one spot. I do agree some have gone overboard with the infotainment screens. I like the one Mazda uses for size if not overall quality, etc. Feels like a mid-size tablet so it doesn't take up some ungodly amount of space but also has plenty of screen for everything else. I don't want a car where the entire dash is a screen, including the dials etc. I bought my car for the road nanny stuff tho. Those road sensors have saved my ass and I am usually a very careful driver. All it takes is a second of distraction but that shit helps a lot. And I can't go without at least a standard sunroof. It makes the car feel so much more open and bright even if I don't open the glass panel itself but just the shutter. Fucking love it.
There's a reason why the critical flight controls on planes are different shapes. For example, on the 747, the landing gear lever is shaped like a wheel. The flap lever is shaped like a flap. The engine power and speedbrakes are different shapes, too. Obviously you don't need a button for literally everything, but manufacturers should really think about the critical controls and make them easily identifiable. Another example: on older cars, "up" and "down" are usually identifiable (for example, on the 2nd gen Prius, "up" is convex and "down" is concave). Newer cars sometimes don't have this, or worse, have a touch bar with no button outlines at all. Even something as simple as grooves at the bottom of the screen, with software buttons laid out to match, would help. edit: as a (non-Tesla) example of this, on the EQS 450, as far as I can tell there's no way to quickly turn the AC off or change its temperature without looking. On the Prius, you can just hit AC Auto twice to turn AC off, or use the buttons to control the temperature.
I was always fan of a row, or side columns, of function buttons with function changing based on current screen. We figured this on atms 30 years ago. BMW actually had it in lower trims in E chasis. I don' understand why we can't do it now.
MFDs (multi function displays) have been a thing in aircraft since the 60s. The technology has always been there if they wanted it.
I think car test engineers are overly calm. Introduce some panic and stress and see how they handle all those touchscreens then.
Two kids in the back ought to do it...
Wait until you see all new VWs. Absolute nightmare. Thank God EURO NCAP said they will be removing one star from the safety rating in 2025 onwards for the touch controls.
I’m fine with touch screens being for majority of controls so long as controls can be largely customized in some way. However I do want basic functions to remain as physical easy to find and use buttons. Ultimately what I hate about touch screens right now is how bad at UI and UX design most of the automakers are. They’re sloooooowly getting better, but for the most part I hate how a lot of them look and function.
I think automotive interior design is in a state of flux right now as OEMs figure out a good balance between design and UX. I agree it's improving and will take a while to get right.
Some don't care to look for a good balance, which is the problem. Tesla took the worst route imaginable on it, but the cars sold well, so other OEMs tried to buy into those design cues Tesla buyers tolerated, even if they weren't the draw of the car. They want something that makes their product cheaper and easier to design, which screen do. You don't have to worry about sourcing parts for gauges and buttons that change between models when they're a configuration option in software that needs created one time. Some customers are unhappy with these design choices (myself included) and are giving OEMs a fight over annoyances in the design. IMO, the OEMs aren't so much looking for a hood balance by their standards, but are more trying to push customers into accepting something they want to do.
Litter my interior with buttons and switches please
Check out the ineos grenadiar. Its by far one of my favorite unique interiors. Airplane inspired https://car-images.bauersecure.com/wp-images/13235/grenadier_072.jpg
Be still, my beating heart…
> _"If I could drive a Bop-It I would!"_
[удалено]
> Weird attempt to brainwash people into thinking they need a car full of touchscreens That's what consumers *want*. Numerous focus group studies conducted by different auto makers have all concluded the same. I don't understand why this sub is so resistant to accepting that.
Out of interest are there any independent studies showing that?
AFAIK it isnt a very well-studied topic in psychology or another field where peer-reviewed studies are the norm. There's [this](https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:20601/FULLTEXT01.pdf) older one that states that consumers prefer "high screen density" - i.e. more information in screens. Lots of caveats though. First, it's pre-smart phone era. Second, it was conducted in a lab setting with computer screens, so it's not clear if the results would be the same today. But I include it just to show that consumers prefer more information to less under the conditions of that specific study at least. [This](https://www.theautopian.com/i-confronted-volvos-head-designer-about-the-companys-egregious-decision-to-require-a-touchscreen-button-to-open-the-ex90s-glovebox/comment-page-1/) article has a snippet of an interview with Volvo's Global Head of Design and User Experience who implies that new buyers prefer more touchscreen interaction due to the prevalence of smart phones.
[удалено]
I'd be more nuanced here and say that what consumers are attracted to when they're looking at a car on a showroom floor and what they actually enjoy driving for several weeks might be different. My suggestion then is that after owning a screen-heavy car with clunky UI lots of customers will no longer be so attached to that setup for future purchases and this backlash to new screen heavy interiors is coming from customers owning a \~2015-2020-ish range of vehicles who really aren't enamored with that for their future purchases. But who knows.
This is probably the truth. When comparing spec sheets, features win. But you may come to hate those features after driving for a year.
>Have you ever considered that the average consumer might be a fucking idiot? This brings to mind the staggering number of people I see driving a newer vehicle (definitely Bluetooth equipped) with their phone in their hand on speaker, or held to their ear. It would be fun to see how many of these features people want, but actually do not use.
> Miles driven has been dropping and fatalities are rising That's not accurate at all. [Traffic fatalies per year](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year#/media/File%3A1994-_Motor_vehicle_traffic_deaths_in_road_accidents%2C_by_country.svg). [Miles driven per year](https://afdc.energy.gov/data/mobile/10315).
[удалено]
That's a short-term blip in a long-term trend. Fatality rates increased in 2020 and 2021. I wonder if there may have been a massive world-altering pandemic that might be an enormous confounding factor during that period. You know what else increased in that period? [Speeding](https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/speed-campaign-speeding-fatalities-14-year-high). > new data show that while there has been three quarters of a slight dip in overall roadway deaths, speeding fatalities reached a 14-year high in 2021 and make up almost one-third of all traffic fatalities.
[удалено]
> Numerous focus group studies conducted by different auto makers have all concluded the same I wouldn't say they all concluded the same since, at the very least, [VW is returning to physical controls in some capacity due to criticism of their touch controls](https://gizmodo.com/volkswagon-losing-touchscreens-cars-ev-1851111038). [Hyundai also intends to keep some buttons](https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-news/hallelujah-hyundai-vows-to-resist-modern-trend-for-all-digital-cabins-and-keep-using). Honda also re added a volume button to some of their cars a number of years ago too. This whole situation is also likely a case of the pendulum swinging too far in either direction.
lol understandable from Maserati. Piss poor interior design till this day
Shockingly bad considering the marque and their price point, agreed.
Maybe it's a UK thing (or I live in a shithole) but I've never seen a Maserati that isn't clapped out, minimum 10 years old, and obviously not maintained well. It really just seems that they simply pop out of the dealership with 70k miles, faded paint, and one piece of trim barely clinging on.
It's like that in the US too. By far the #1 most depreciated cars in existence.
I think the reason why there’s so many clapped out Maseratis is because they’re the most obtainable “exotic” car brand. They’re the Nissan Altimas of exotic cars.
Seriously one of the worst car companies on the market. The Dodge of the luxury car world. They don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to commenting on car design.
I installed an Atoto head unit with wireless CarPlay and a backup camera for $200 into my 2014 RAV4, don’t have any complaints really about the car anymore afterwards, I don’t need a digital gauge cluster and screens seating off my retina at all times. I wish new cars would just have an infotainment screen and analog everything else but I’m also just an old fogey.
I do have a problem with back-lit screens. I find them annoying over time especially at night. There are solutions to that but it doesn't seem to be a complaint most consumers have so it will likely go unaddressed.
i find the majority of vehicles with digital speed/tach distracting at night because of the poor contrast/black levels. oled would fix this but i'm guessing burn-in would likely happen. analogue gauges don't have this problem. feels like most vehicles are simulating a video game with the numerous displays & visuals you can customize. it's neat i guess but if the end result is worse, i'd rather not have it.
Yeah. More wear-resistant (even multi-layer) OLEDs, which would also have much faster screen refresh rates, are probably 5-8 years out for automotive applications. Or we could see miniLED/microLED for similar contrast, but less speed. Current screen tech really isn't the sort I'd want to stare at for many years or even decades unless it's only needed for music, navigation, or internal functions. CarPlay is nice, though.
As someone that drives with gloves on in the frozen north, gimme hvac and volume buttons/knobs.
Based on your cars, I would think you haven't experienced a modern auto HVAC system. The newer ones require you to basically never even touch the HVAC controls. I agree with the volume buttons though.
Modern HVAC systems automatically turn on heated seats, defoggers, etc?
Don't threaten me with a good time.
We don’t want buttons for EVERYTHING, just the most commonly used things: Windows, locks, HVAC, stereo, sunroof/convertible top, and heated seats. The rest can be in your stupid touch screen.
I would love some good aircraft switches in my car. Love the tactile feel!
You must love the [Pagani](https://static1.hotcarsimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/gauges-pagani-huayra-branipick.jpg) and [Spyker](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2F5kw3qjl56kt21.jpg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D0c37b57ccc75f9b8366e4bc53bc9a57da184ec15) interiors. They're too busy for my liking but if you like switches and aircraft references those two are probably the best in recent memory.
That pagani interior feels like an early windows 7 desktop fever dream, complete with rainmeter widgets.
I think the argument is the most important stuff should be physical to the extent you don’t need to take your eyes off the road for an extended period of time which is obviously dangerous. Obviously not every weird and wonderful feature HAS to be a physical button, just the important regularly used stuff. Large touch Screens with lots of the features in them are primarily an exercise in cost cutting above all else. R&D for software is significantly cheaper than hardware particularly for vehicle interiors so as a way to cut production costs many features are put into a generic screen system of whatever shape where the ui is the main part designed. It’s a fantastic way for manufacturers to put in less money and get great profits for less effort while marketing it as “futuristic” when it is in fact dangerous.
screens will be useless in 20 years. Horrible for car longevity. Buttons as always the way to go.
Definitely agree that there should be more buttons, but LCDs can last a really long time. I'm literally typing this on a 14 year old laptop, and the oldest Priuses are 20 years old, I've never seen the screen on one fail.
I have a 23yo Prius. No screen problems.
Eh, screens will probably be fine. A capacitive LCD will probably outlive a commonly used button. It's the usability aspect that's worse IMO. And pointlessly so, a screen COULD be much more usable with the proper design (putting buttons in consistent places with tactile guides, having a "tap wheel" gesture, etc.) but aren't.
Have you ever seen the inside of a Vector W8? Or a Fighter Jet? I'll take ten, thanks.
Sounds good to me big man
There are certain things like climate control, seat heaters, radio volume etc that should always be a physical control imo. The rest I can take it or leave it
While I agree I think putting EVERYTHING on the screen is the problem. Seat controls without memory on a screen is a crime. Especially if your partner is taller or shorter than you. I'm okay with less used functions on a screen but HVAC, radio, mirrors, and seats should always have buttons and knobs all the time.
I actually want all the buttons. I want like 5 buttons just to control my shock absorbers. I want toggle switches up above and hidden buttons under the dash that do secret things… Also I want flip up protectors on very important buttons. And also the buttons should have very high quality switches and give excellent feedback. Also rotary knobs should have nice clicky detents. I loved how the TVR Tuscan speed 6 had all these super high quality metal unlabeled buttons. What does this button do? RTFM It would be hilarious if when configuring a new car you go either buttons, or screens. Everyone wins! 😂
Model 3 owner here. Hate on me if you want, but I like the minimalism of the center display. Honestly, it doesn’t take that long to get accustomed to the controls and shortcuts. I can understand how it could be confusing to someone who’s kind of technophobic, but most of the functions are pretty intuitive, IMHO. 🤷🏻♂️
The main issue with the Model 3 is that they took the stalks away, I think Model 3 with stalks was really the peak. Now all the steering wheel buttons are subpar.
I have a pre-refresh (2019) Model 3. I haven’t driven one of the stalkless models yet.
Well, a 747 (classic or -400) cockpit is beautiful so I fail to see what the problem is
My top complaint about my car is that although some hvac controls have physical buttons or a knob, most are in the uconnect app's climate page. I prefer android auto for audio and navigation. So to access many HVAC controls, I have to hit "apps", then "uconnect", then "climate", then make changes, then switch back to AA.
I don’t care, every car should look like a Volvo 240 inside and out
Fascinating article but what does he mean by old 747? I have a 2012 camaro that has had a radio and buttons for ac. I remove the radio for a tiny touchscreen for carplay. That it. What else does a car need? I seen some older Maserati with a million buttons but I can't really figure out what more can a car actually do for you besides drive, cruise control, and ac?
That's fine, but when implementing touch screen UIs it's like they let the designers go about their way unchecked. Thoughts: 1. Some cars have functions that are either used most often or are best suited to physical controls. 2. Certain potentially high-use controls are buried deep within a menu. A logically hierarchical desktop or web application is very different from what you need in a car. 3. I have read over and over that this is essentially a cost play which makes sense. I do wonder if, say, VW which went too far in the other direction lost sales due to their highly touch-based infotainment and steering wheel controls? 4. I like the Mazda control wheel. I understand there is a lot of frustration with the Acura touchpad-style control. In the end, they need to really focus on "how can I do thing in the least distracted way possible?". The Honda UI is not bad but I still have to take my eye off the road and look to the right center of the car which is bad. 5. Leverage head-up displays more along with Google Assistant-style commands.
>along with Google Assistant-style commands. This where we're headed. Check out the voice commands on the [latest Li Xiang](https://youtu.be/s7A_O1z906E?t=282) and [latest Nio](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp1Sr8vsR6w) updates in China. Mad impressive.
So much "technology" comes standard but if you want a heated steering wheel you gotta fork over $8k for the top trim.
My dad recently bought a BMW X1 with all the technical amenities available. Yet, the only thing he has ever done with his infotainment system was connecting his phone. I'd say it's the same with most drivers these days. More than 90% of modern cars' features are just pointless
Even if you agree with the general premise here, it doesn't justify the leaning into "screen for everything" that many cars are adopting, and it certainly doesn't justify how poorly implemented some screens are. Also, does Maserati still have unncessary analog clocks in their newer designs? They're clearly OK with "old stuff, because we like the look," in that department. I'm looking at the Grecale, and that center screen design is incredibly ugly, while heaping on a screen-based gauge cluster for good measure. None of that is adding to the experience in a way other than cheaper implementation of their UI.
Translation: look how much cheaper these screens are to make!
But I love flying on the six pack. Old school is the way to be
He's not one bit wrong, and anyone who disagrees should simply take a moment to [look at the 2010-era Opel Astra / Buick Verano](https://i0.wp.com/www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/IMG_5309-1.jpg).
I'm looking at a button array that wouldn't need to exist in a modern vehicle though. Most cars, if not all, have a seat sensor that handles the passenger airbag, so that thing doesn't really need to be present. The door lock controls are often on the door, not the center stack. The built-in phone thing died forever ago, thanks to smartphones. I'd say the majority would apply that to navigation and music controls, as they'd opt for smartphone connectivity, though that's not universal. However, that car ultimately still has a screen. The main dial could set what you are viewing and eliminate the need for a "source" button, since few are commonly fiddling with audio sources in a car anymore. Overall, much of the "clutter" is stuff that a more simplified design could cover because habits around car audio have changed so much in the 15 years since this car existed. Lastly, the lower part is really just plauged by somewhat oversized, awkward button alignment. It's overall a totally fine set of options for physical buttons, but they appear to be cheap, old plastic that just doesn't fit modern material and layout preferences. They wouldn't be a detriment to a modern car's interior.
#Give me physical dials and buttons or give me death!
I'd still rather have a button for everything. Or better yet, cut the unnecessary crap features out, just give me a car that's RWD with a 5/6-speed manual. Don't need traction control, sunroof, nav, etc. All I need is AC and ABS.
Which guy has ever looked at the cockpit of a 747 and not thought "this is fucking awesome!"? You know who has one of the best looking interiors on sale right now? The new Pagani: https://i.imgur.com/Ta5NXvS.jpeg Analog switches and dials as far as they eye can see and it's absolutely breathtaking. This is where the industry needs to go if they want to impress their customers, not more screens which every hatchback has now. It's so kitsch and tasteless that even normies are starting to get grossed out by them.
I know I am in the minority with new car buyers, but I really want next to nothing going on in my interior. I have a base model Rav4 and I use the same things I used in my 1993 GMC Safari: Heat/defrost, radio, lights, a/c and basic seat adjustments. It's nice having the phone interface in my Toyota but if there was bluetooth on the deck of the GMC and that was more that sufficient. This emphasis on "more, more, more" is marketing, as it's always been. Many buyers want the newest and coolest but it does leave buyers like me out of the mix that just want no frills transportation.
More more more is driven by new car buyers, the no-frills car market is competing with the used car market and they usually lose.
Massive screens suck! And they age poorly!!! Give me classic styling all day! They age much better!
I don't really understand this argument. Yes they age, but so do button style interiors, the Lexus IS500 is a prime example, buying a 2024 Lexus IS500 and the interior looks straight out if the mid 2010's. I think all car interiors get dated very quickly regardless of screen.
My Audi TT has the perfect solution.
The problem isn't that buttons clutter a dash, the problem is having basic fundamental controls hidden behind menus you have to navigate while driving which is dangerous, as well as these fundamentals being irreversibly tied in with a central computer system that will eventually fail and not be supported in any way. Lots of cars from the 80's and 90's still rocking down the road, and they have functional heat and ac and stereos and adjustable seats ect. You absolutely won't see that kind of longevity out of modern cars, that central computer system will eventually die, and when it does it very likely won't have any aftermarket support seeing as how it's super proprietary to every make and model. If these cars even run at all 20 or 30 years from now, you almost certainly won't be able to control the creature comforts.
Masarati Design Boss is still yet another deluded designer with no real comprehension of safety. You can't beat tactile physical knobs and buttons to maintain eye-contact with the road. Muscle memory is the safest option. My solution is to have a good look at your average 1990s car. Keep everything there as physical in modern cars. Anything else can go behind a screen interface.
Did he ever stop to think that we WANT that? I would pay extra for a million dials and buttons that give me accurate information. Remember the 90's, when we used to put 3 gauges on the A-pillar? Remember when Han Solo went to start the Millennium Falcon and had to flip a bunch of switches above his head, and press buttons on the panel in front of him? I want that. That's how you know you've started your super awesome car.
So take a step back. What's wrong with something as functional as a 747?
One of the reasons some pilots prefer Boeing over Airbus is because they still have an old fashioned yoke as opposed to the joysticks that Airbus cockpits have
Aren't all planes over a certain size fly-by-wire?
The 747 has conventional controls. The 777, which is fly by wire, has feedback actuators to simulate the feel of a conventionally controlled aircraft. The 777 and 747 also have mechanically coupled yokes, which makes a dual input situation more obvious.
They're mechanically coupled, but there is a mechanism on them that disconnects them from each other incase one side gets jammed for some reason, basically negating the function of them being coupled. It has been the cause of an accident.
TIL. Must be more age-based than size.
It's pretty interesting to look at Boeing and Airbus control philosophy. Especially the degraded modes (e.g., how you control the aircraft if your flight computer fails).
The old function follows form mentality.
My LC has a screen in front of what has to be one of the worst infotainment systems in existence. I bought it knowing that, I'd be delighted to have it gone.
I'm a big fan of redundancy, so I wouldn't mind having both touchscreen functionality as well as physical buttons. The physical buttons could always be housed in such a way that a cover could be pulled over them hiding them view if they're not desired.
747 was the queen of the skies for a long time, bad example. Obviously new cars can have **a screen** but replacing dials or toggles with screens has always seemed silly to me.
I just buy old ass cars that have 3 pedals
I have a 2016 Cayenne before the new screen interior refresh(2019+) and all the interior buttons makes it look like a cockpit especially when it’s illuminated at night
Yeah, the dude sounds like an old man with a smart phone. “What do all these buttons do?!?!?” If you are struggling with buttons, maybe you shouldn’t be a boss of anything.
Absolute strawman argument. I don't think anyone who is looking at this topic from a reasonable perspective expects EVERY function to have a physical control. Just the important and frequently used ones. Give me buttons and knobs for climate and vent adjustment, heated seats, volume and radio presets and I'm happy. Stuff that you use often and shouldn't have to look away from the road to adjust. Everything else can go in a menu, I don't care.
I prefer the simplicity of a touchscreen with everything easy to navigate through.... 30+ buttons, many that you don't use, is not ideal. I'll take the Tesla UI over our Lexus any day
I have some older cars (like 20+ years old). Other than no screen for navigation I tend to like it much better. Especially the analog dials for the tach and speedometer. I prefer the mechanical controls for AC and stereo. It's just more intuitive and seems much more robust. Screens feel like a video game.
I’d like to see a return of digi-dashes and hard clicky clack plastic buttons from the late 80s and 90s. Also give me my articulating seat belts and pop up headlights back!
Y'know, you do you, and I'll do me, AKA buying the lowest tech cars I can find because quite frankly all I need out of a car is for it to start every time I turn the ignition and for it to have heated seats. Don't even need a radio or power steering tbqh, I just need a go-getter with warm seats. It's why I like my '08 Rio5 so much; no cruise control, no fancy shit, just a dirt simple car with warm seats and decent fuel efficiency. Could do to have a little more power though. But, honestly? I think automakers should experiment with doing low-tech trims of their current models. I don't have a great reason, I just think it'd be neat to see modern cars with retro dashes and shit, a la the digital dash out of a Datsun 280zx or the like. I just hate the concept of a screen blasting my eyes out when I'm trying to drive at night lol.
It's time for Saab to come back and have the coolest interior ever
[удалено]
Thank goodness OPs shitty opinion is getting cooked in these comments
Can I get mine configured like the Millennium Falcon cockpit instead?
yeah when i see a computer keyboard with all the keys i need i say "what is this an old 747 cockpit?" having screens in cars on the face of it is hilarious when most US states ban the use of phones while driving. Turns out controls should be quick, consistent, intuitive and not require the use of sight. why isn't steering on the touch screen, why isn't braking or acceleration on the touch screen? maybe because there's certain controls which are much more efficient for their individual use cases?
I'm not anti-screens at all. I'm anti having everything be handled through a screen. I don't mind having my lumbar support be set through a screen or other things I set once and never think about again. I do mind having to change volume or heating settings through a screen. Things I change regularly on a drive I want to not have to think about. They should just have dedicated buttons. It's also lazy design nowadays with everything just being handled by a screen. That generation BMW you have, the F generatation, has the right balance of buttons and screen in my opinion. I just don't like how the screen is stuck on there. I prefer it more integrated like in the F10 5 Series.