A Great Idea for Auto Touchscreens

"It's a "Porch-uh"" (ikazuchi) 02/20/2014 at 12:41 • Filed to: UX

0

11

While the big touchscreen in the Model S (and an increasing amount of other cars) looks cool and does a lot of neat things, they have a big flaw that increases the amount of distraction for the driver. I'm not talking about web browsers ("now I can read Oppo when I drive") or video ("now I can watch porn when I drive"), I'm talking about the complete lack of tactile buttons and switches. Instead of being able to reach over and feel for the volume knob or HVAC fan control, you have to look over and see where the button on the screen is and watch as you guide your finger to the right spot.

Many manufacturers point to their voice controls as the way you should interface with the car controls while driving, but I haven't found one yet that works well on a regular basis.

"Call wife."
"Playing 'Culture Club Greatest Hits'"
"No, damnit! Call. Wife."
"A/C to maximum."
"AHHRRGGH! SO COLD!"

Well since those screens are not going away, designer Matthaeus Krenn came up with a pretty great concept. His idea is that you can adjust up to eight different controls depending on how many fingers and the spacing of your fingers on the screen.

It's not perfect (what if you're missing a finger or three), but it takes away a lot of the UX issues with current automotive displays. Like physical buttons, it will take you a bit to learn, but eventually your muscle memory will make adjustments quickly and easily. I hope manufacturers take note. This isn't an iPad in your car and shouldn't be treated that way.

MooseKnuckles > It's a "Porch-uh" 02/20/2014 at 12:46

0

Seems like it may not be as versatile. You basically get control over 5 options. I guess if there is still buttons to switch between menu items: 1. Favourites 2. HVAC 3. Audio-choose input then a sub menu for normal audio functions 4. Nav 5. etc...

oldirtybootz > It's a "Porch-uh" 02/20/2014 at 12:52

0

I love the Uconnect 8.4 in my car but it's far from perfect. The voice commands are useless, I asked to switch my audio source to bluetooth, not tune to radio sex.

ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable) > It's a "Porch-uh" 02/20/2014 at 12:56

1

http://gizmodo.com/nope-buttons-o…

Nope.

Buttons or nothing.

We do not need further distraction from "clever" or "novel" new touch-screen based UIs. Buttons always work when you press them. And when they don't you need only replace a few, very inexpensive components. When touch-screens stop working, you have a very, very expensive brick mounted in the middle of you dash.

Sethersm > It's a "Porch-uh" 02/20/2014 at 12:57

1

Interesting. I would presume that the function your fingers control could probably be linked to the physical action too. This would allow segregation of different types of controls into different actions.

For instance, perhaps all the radio controls could be sliding type controls. Volume, touch and slide up or down. Change station or song, touch and slide left or right.

Then heat/air controls could be rotary type controls. Fan, two fingers twist clockwise or counterclockwise. Temp, three fingers twist.

I would think finger spacing would be difficult to get right. Different people have different sized hands. Unless the car is supposed to learn each person's hands...

It's a "Porch-uh" > ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable) 02/20/2014 at 13:07

0

I'm with you... to a point, but you sound like my parents, who tried to keep power windows out of their cars as long as possible "because it's one more thing to break."

Touch screens are not going away because they offer a great deal of flexibility and the cost to develop them is actually pretty good for the auto makers compared to the development and production of physical buttons.

You can rally against technology all you want, but it's happening. If you don't like it, buy an older car like I did. One of the reasons I choose the E39 M5 over the E60 was the lower amount of computer control that allowed me to do more work on the car without having to take it to a dealer.

It's a "Porch-uh" > Sethersm 02/20/2014 at 13:09

0

The finger spacing looks to be pretty broad, so hand size shouldn't matter, to a point. Like my 3-yr-old might not be able to make his fingers wide enough, which is fine, because he should keep his grubby little hands off my car.

ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable) > It's a "Porch-uh" 02/20/2014 at 13:10

0

Touch-screens have their use in vehicles, sure.

For things like radio volume and tuning and climate control, the things people are most likely to adjust while driving touch-screens have zero reason to be used.

I do not care how novel or clever your new UI is. We need fewer distractions while driving not more.

Jayhawk Jake > ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable) 02/20/2014 at 13:51

0

We don't 'need' anything.

I'm so tired of that argument. 'WE DON"T NEED RADIOS JUST DRIVE'

There are lots of things we don't need, it doesn't matter. People want touchscreens in their cars. They want their car's systems to look attractive and operate well and do fancy things just like their smartphones and tablets do.

And as to your second point, do you have any backup for this touchscreen breaking example, or are you just being a fuddy duddy and whining about the possibility of something breaking? My Dad's old Acura MDX has a touchscreen system. It's a 2001 model year, it has over 100,000 miles on it, and the touchscreen has never had a problem. I don't think reliability is nearly as much of an issue as you are making it out to be.

ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable) > Jayhawk Jake 02/20/2014 at 13:58

0

I never said cars can't have radios, AC, ass-warmers, blue-teeth, or any fancy whizzbangs and doodads.

People can have anything they want in their cars, provided they FUCKING PAY ATTENTION TO THE DRIVING PART OF DRIVING!

People are also dumb. Just because they have a touch-screen smart phone does not mean there needs to be one in the car. Alas, you are correct. People want these things, so manufacturers add more distracting gadgets.

I also did not say or imply that screens are any more or less reliable than buttons. Only that some shaped plastic, metal, wiring, and relays is always going to be significantly cheaper to replace than an enormous touch-screen.

Jayhawk Jake > ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable) 02/20/2014 at 16:25

0

You are assuming replacing a display will be more expensive. The display itself maybe, but if it dies the labor is minimal. Pop it out, pop in a new one. Not taking apart the whole thing to replace a button, and then having the service people decide it would just be easier to replace the whole thing and doing it anyways.

Personally, I think big touchscreens can help cut down on the distraction of a cell phone. With a cell phone you are looking down at a tiny screen that moves. With a touchscreen infotainment system, it's fixed to the car, large, legible, and raised to a point where you aren't looking at your lap. It also only takes one hand to operate versus taking both hands off the wheel to use a cell phone.

In a perfect world people would keep their hands at 10 and 2 and look straight ahead, but they don't. I'd rather they glance at a touchscreen than play with their phone.

ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable) > Jayhawk Jake 02/20/2014 at 16:44

0

The parts bill for the display will always be more than the parts bill for a button.

You're right labor is different. But, I'm willing to bet that the cost of replacing a button is still less than replacing a screen.

Big screens will help. There is no reason to make them touch capable when one can have simple buttons for action initiation.

Even better would be large screens coupled with voice commands. Right now computers don't understand us very well. But more development of speech recognition would enable people to keep their hands on the wheel while they tell the car to make a phone call, pick a song, change the radio, etc.