News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Honda bucks industry trend by removing touchscreen controls by derefr on Tuesday March 31, 2020 @01:30PM (#22739987)
> The problem that touch interfaces solve, ever since the advent of the first smart phone, is that the interface is now dynamic. You can change it without having to replace the hardware.

I mean, the other point of a dynamic interface is that you can now have more controls than would fit on a static interface. Touchscreen fit-to-purpose controls might suck more than hardware fit-to-purpose controls, but either option is better than a single set of generic controls that control multiple systems that "should" have different control paradigms, translating to the generic controls being a compromised bad fit for any use-case.

E.g. a hardware English-language keyboard is probably better than a touchscreen English-language keyboard (though people with modern Blackberries might dispute this); but both are better than entering English text through T9 on a dial pad. And the touchscreen has the benefit of allowing you to have more keyboards (for e.g. the multiple native languages you type that use different alphabets), which wouldn't even fit on the phone as hardware keyboards.

I bring this up, because eventually you run out of space to stuff additional controls. As airplanes become ever-more advanced, their cockpits will approach that point. At that point, dynamic affordances may be necessary, just so you can have some kind of "pagination" allowing you to squeeze more controls in. (Hopefully it'd just be for the non-time-critical switches to flip.)

Re:Honda bucks industry trend by removing touchscreen controls by mywittyname on Tuesday March 31, 2020 @02:51PM (#22741058)
There's always the possibility for hybrid UIs. Something with physical inputs with a dynamic display based on context, like a screen above a series of buttons and maybe a dial at the end ( think ATMs) or even buttons with OLED displays.

It's the best or worst of both worlds depending on your perspective, but they do offer superior hands-free operation over a pure touch device, but at the sacrifice of interface flexibility.

Re:Honda bucks industry trend by removing touchscreen controls by ak217 on Tuesday March 31, 2020 @10:08PM (#22744926)
Also known as an MFD, and used for many decades in the aviation industry.

MFDs were pioneered in fighter jets, where the cockpit physical space is extremely limited while the amount of information the pilot has to deal with is far beyond any civilian pilot workload.

MFDs combine the durability of physical controls with the configurability and flexibility of screens, and it's completely beyond me why they are not standard equipment in all cars.

Re:Honda bucks industry trend by removing touchscreen controls by BostonFern on Thursday April 02, 2020 @10:15AM (#22759190)
That's a funny coincidence. Two days ago, I was searching the Web for cars with MFDs after watching a review covering the Porsche Taycan's touchscreen interface, thinking how odd it was that I couldn't find any.
Re:Honda bucks industry trend by removing touchscreen controls by NovemberWhiskey on Tuesday March 31, 2020 @05:45PM (#22742991)
>Something with physical inputs with a dynamic display based on context, like a screen above a series of buttons and maybe a dial at the end

BMW's iDrive is, I think, the canonical early example of this in the automotive world.

Re:Honda bucks industry trend by removing touchscreen controls by jsight on Tuesday March 31, 2020 @01:42PM (#22740166)
> I mean, the other point of a dynamic interface is that you can now have more controls than would fit on a static interface.

I think this point is lost sometimes, but is also useful. My car has a lot of physical controls. Some of the ones that are useful during driving are tucked inconveniently below my left knee!

Moving some less frequently used controls to a touch screen might actually benefit some of these designs.

Re:Honda bucks industry trend by removing touchscreen controls by hnarn on Tuesday March 31, 2020 @01:38PM (#22740110)
I'm not disagreeing with anything you're saying and despite my somewhat ranting comment I am not completely opposed to a mix of touchscreens and hardware interfaces: but I think you'll agree that there needs to be a decision made in terms of safety when you decide to use a touchpad for input. If you're adjusting the screen brightness on your smart phone, that slider doesn't have to be perfect, and maybe adjusting the cabin lights for an airliner doesn't have to be either: I'm just dreading the day when things like navigational headings and airspeed creeps into a touch interface because of "convenience". But if my observation about this trend is wrong, which I hope, that separation of concerns will stay in future designs as well.