[pwg]

> so I didn't understand why automakers kept shoving them in.

The article explained why. Since 2018 in the US, due to the proliferation of giant trucks being used as passenger vehicles (SUV's) backup cameras have been mandatory safety equipment. A backup camera requires a screen. So the automakers have to install a screen in the dashboard.

It is only a few dollars more to install a "touch screen" vs. a "basic display screen", and with the addition of those few dollars to the screen, that touch screen can now replace hundreds of dollars of physical buttons and their necessary wiring.

Net result, the BOM cost of the car drops by several hundred dollars, and the cost to assemble drops by some measurable amount as well.

So they why is: "because they save the automakers BOM and assembly costs".

[jjav]

> So the automakers have to install a screen in the dashboard.

Perfect example of reasonably good intention backfiring.

So now you have a backup camera, which is useful, but you also have drivers fiddling around with a touchscreen while driving, taking eyes and concentration off the road.

I don't have research numbers, but it feels like the latter causes way more accidents than the backup camera prevents.

My partner has one of these newer cars where everything is a multi-menu operation through the touchscreen and it is very scary. Anything you need to change takes many many seconds of visual attention focusing on the touchscreen, which means not focusing at the road. I'm quite sure this will lead to an accident at some point.

Personally none of my cars have a screen and none ever will. I can adjust everything that can be adjusted purely by feel without ever taking my eyes off the road. Clearly that is safer.

[soco]

> Personally none of my cars have a screen and none ever will. I can adjust everything that can be adjusted purely by feel without ever taking my eyes off the road. Clearly that is safer.

You can also have the best of both worlds. I'm not pretending it's an ideal car, but my Audi has plenty of knobs and buttons and switches for about anything I usually need. You only are forced to use the screen for switching between radio and bluetooth music (maybe there's a button for that too and I don't know it), for setting up the navigation and of course the zillion of car settings. So do I have a screen? Yes. Do I depend on it? Really no. So folks, there IS a way, we just have to push for it.

[birdostrich]

They're aware. You're replying to the OP of the article, lol.

[nkozyra]

Obviously they read it, but it's 2026 and entirely possible to publish an article without having read a word of it :)

All that said, I think initially it was a mix of a few things coming together.

Yes, auto mfgs always want to reduce parts for cost and supply chain control. But there was also this moment of New Wow where the impractical nature of touchscreens was overshadowed by the holy crap I've got a tablet in my car. It implied a break with the last generation of cars, where you might have gotten a 4-inch screen (touch or not), and it became desirable at a surface level to users.

Although I greatly dislike touchscreens for the obvious usability issues in a motor vehicle, I still kind of widen my eyes when I'm in a car with some new, ridiculous multi-screen dashboard setup.

Mazda was mentioned in this thread, and I think they do a great job of separating the concerns here; you've got a big buttons of various sizes that do different things that can be memorized without sight.