SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
When I went car shopping recently, I was amazed by the autonomous technologies in most new models: automatic lane-keeping, braking to avoid collisions and parallel parking, for example.
But I was appalled by the state of dashboard technology. Technology sells, so car companies are all about touch screens and apps these days. Unfortunately, they're truly terrible at designing user interfaces (UIs)—the ways that you, the human, are supposed to interact with it, the car. A good user interface (a) is easy to navigate, (b) puts frequently used controls front and center, (c) gives clear feedback as you make a change and (d) is apparently beyond the capabilities of today's car companies. I asked my Twitter followers to help me nominate the World's Worst Car UI Designs—and I was flooded with responses.
Source:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/automobile-dashboard-technology-is-simply-awful/
Submitted via IRC for AndyTheAbsurd
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 12 2018, @11:10AM (5 children)
Part of this effect is also due to a desire to shave pennies in every possible location during manufacture of the car.
Old style (physical buttons/knobs that you can operate by touch/memory):
Each car has to have a completely separate "button unit" designed and built because no two are similar enough to share the same "button unit". Sometimes even within the same model the "low end" and "luxury" models need separate "button units" because although the dash area is the same size, the set of buttons and controls differs so much that we don't want 35 dead buttons on the low end model.
Each different "button unit" is extra cost.
New style (LCD touch panel). One single raw LCD panel (or maybe two or three different size panels) and 57 different basic simple plastic bezels for the panels replace 287 different unique button panels. And the LCD panel is "assembled" by simply flashing the firmware for "car model X with option set Y" instead of needing "button panel 1" for option set Y, and panel 2 for option set Z, and panel 3 for option set A.
Suddenly the cost to build the dash control system is much lower. Instead of needing 200+ different button panels built, they need 3 different LCD touch screens, 50 some simple plastic trim bezels (real easy to design, *very* easy to make), and the right firmware for the car (stored in a computer, injected by the robot on the assembly line).
Much cheaper BOM for the car maker. And since safety regulations have not caught up to "new tech" touch screens and their inherent dangers as the sole car systems control unit while driving, there's no regulation saying they can't do this.
Plus, early tests showed that all the idiot purchasers were "wowed" by the touch screen and wanted one (because "new shiny thing") and so, here we are, with nothing but touch screens in our cars, where to adjust the temperature from the heat you have to locate the "heat" menu select button, press it to get a different screen to appear, then locate the temp up or down button (depending on which change is needed) and press it, all while keeping your eyes on the road so you don't hit something or so you can avoid the guy in the next lane doing the same with his/her touch screen and drifting into your lane because they took their eyes off the road to look at the screen in order to find where to press to get to what they want to do.
(Score: 2) by kazzie on Thursday April 12 2018, @01:34PM (4 children)
Another example:
My last car had front electric windows, with the switches for operating them on the doors. (When electric windows were first introduced this was the obvious place to put them, as that's where the hand crank was.) As well as one switch per door/window, the driver had a switch to operate the passenger window without having to lean across. Thus a total of three switches per car.
My current car also has front electric windows, but the switches are now either side of the gearstick, below the centre console. Because both are within easy reach of the driver, two switches per car will suffice. A cost saving of one switch plus wiring per car!
(On a car with four electric windows, the savings can stack up to three switches plus wiring.)
(Score: 2) by ElizabethGreene on Thursday April 12 2018, @03:14PM (3 children)
Having the power windows switches in the center of the car makes it less likely a kiddo will step on them, roll down the window, and fall out. I've heard this cited as a reason for the change, but don't know if it's true.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 12 2018, @05:54PM
Having power window switches in the middle also makes it less likely that the switch will short out due to opening the door while it's raining.
Of course, having it in the middle leaves them vulnerable to drink spillage, but at least that can be blamed on the owner, not the manufacturer.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by toddestan on Friday April 13 2018, @12:55AM
Having the switches there also means they don't have to do anything different for RHD and LHD drive cars, whereas with the switches in the door, they need different door panels, rerouting the wiring, etc. Though sometimes they didn't bother for low volume markets - for example I know some cars sold in Austrailia, the passenger ended up with all the window switches because it was the same door as the US version.
(Score: 2) by kazzie on Friday April 13 2018, @11:55AM
I can't picture how kids could step on window switches on the front doors only (as in my cars). In four-window setups I'd expect the centre console switches to be stepped on more often than the door switches (but only when the kids aren't belted up).
All the cars I've known (in the UK) have rear door windows that only open ~2/3 of the way, partly to protect kids from doing silly things.