I tried going back to an old car, but 45mpg hybrid Kia Niro, push button to start, Android Auto, backup camera, blind spot warning, blue tooth, and adaptive cruise control, etc, never again will I drive an old car.

And the Niro has a pretty responsive touchscreen interface, but also has hard buttons and knobs for all the essential features (volume control, climate control, etc). Very well designed car at a very reasonable price, just wish they offered AWD.

That is like a $90 head unit from Amazon, my friend, except for adaptive cruise control and a pushbutton, though that is not difficult or expensive to add either.

I also would like to add the emergency break assist. I have already had that save me from one accident, I suspect this is very hard to add aftermarket. Plus a $90 head unit will be utter crap.

You would be surprised at the level of quality, but a $30 head unit, still not bad.

But, yes, you have me on the emergency brake assist.

You can get mid 2000s car with many of those features and without the bloat.

Can you find a mid-2000s car that gets 50mpg?

Meaybe some lightweight fiat/renault/citröen would do.

How much does a mid-2000s Prius with a new battery cost?

The problem is it could really help, but they target the absolute lowest denominator and make horrible UX decisions.

For example, I'd love a steering wheel full of high-contrast color buttons for every essential feature, similar to F1 / race vehicles. You don't even need to take your eyes off the road once you memorize the layout - far safer than assorted touchscreens and dials, as well as being quicker to use. But good luck selling that to the average consumer!

In general I agree with your sentiment. Software can definitely be used to improve vehicles (ABS anyone?) but it has done be done completely correctly. In light of the recent Boeing fiasco (and other automotive software debacles) it's apparent that companies won't take it seriously until hundreds of lives are lost or they get fined into oblivion.