[SV_BubbleTime]

>rationale of their touch interfaces...

Automotive EE here, I can explain that.

Its cost. Done.

There is design and engineering in buttons and micros that are responsive, durable, perform how the user expects.

There is designer placement. Ergonomics and accessibility. This button is perfect and looks great here, but for a 5-percentile height Female it is outside the limits so, let’s redesign a ton of things to move it done here where it is stupid for everyone.

Digital buttons have almost zero cost and could be changed at will. There is also no holding a vehicle on a lot for weeks because the micro that switch bank X uses is unavailable.

For annoying reference, some of the new GM trucks have no fog light buttons. You need to access that through the primary screen. It’s all cost.

It’s basically an afterthought now. If they get enough complaints they can change it, otherwise, it must be fine and within expected grumpy user margins.

[macintux]

Chevy (and I guess Tesla before them) is removing headlight switches entirely which is the topic of much justified angst. Safety controls should never only be accessible from a touch screen.

https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a42953152/the-2023-chevy-c...

[Tempest1981]

Can't wait to try that line with my boss:

> Katcherian claims that his team removed all possible bugs from the infotainment system.

[wkat4242]

Yeah any software engineer knows what a terrible BS statement this is.

[toss1]

Very annoyed at these digital buttons and especially buried options on touch screens (high-skilled driver, had racing license etc.). IT's da,n dangerous, increasing driver workload fumbling around for the right control that used to be by touch

OK I get the cost - if that's the case, let us configure it! E.g., essential to have the windsield defrost in an upper corner of the button array so when it fogs suddenly in traffic at night, I can just reach and hit it, instead of fumbling around blind....

[SV_BubbleTime]

Sorry, that would be more cost!

Plus, they need it to look fancy. If someone gets in your vehicle and the screen doesn’t look good, they might not buy the same vehicle.

It’s all cost, and digital isn’t free, but it’s way cheaper than physical buttons.

[toss1]

Oh geez, that's probably right. So, we're doomed?

I suppose the market is clearly moving away from anyone who actually drives e.g., see the lousy uptake of manual transmissions.

Yet this seems very serious. I think the job of the automobile's cockpit designer is to reduce the driver's workload and maximize the ease and reliability/repeatability of any needed action to control the car. This now seems to have been replaced with "provide the cheapest possible controls to minimally carry out some functions".

The result is that even significant functions that are carried out while driving require multi-layer on-screen menu navigation! I can hardly think of anything more hazardous - actively reating a function that requires continuous attention for multiple seconds (when you'll go 100m in 3-4 seconds); even with actual training to rapidly rotate my gaze between windscreen, mirrors, & dashboard, this is difficult, and likely mostly impossible for ordinary drivers.

Does management just not GAF about these issues? Crazy

EDIT: My first thought is a set of physical buttons with the logo for the function (heat, defrost, rear defrost, seat heater, etc.) that we can just pull and put in the arrangement on the row where we want them. But then that's probably more expensive. At least let us move items around at the block level in the touchscreen menu tree and screens? Again, more coding, and I get why we can't just open-source it. Isn't there any way to get someone involved that has an understanding of actual driver kinesiology and workload?