I'm happy that Mazda, by comparison, is specifically moving away from touchscreens and strictly to a combination of dedicated physical controls and more limited screens with a dial/puck control.

Also, for me, outdoorsy kit should be operable in gloves. Vehicles with hearing are a bit of an exception I guess, but still.

A touch screen is cheaper, because they can re-use the same hardware between different vehicles rather than having to design/build/assemble a slightly different set of physical buttons for different models with different features.

It also allows for the interface to improve/evolve over time with software updates, something that Tesla has very much taken advantage of. Tesla Model S's from 2012 still get software updates with new features from time to time.

I think Tesla implementing major advances like intermittent wipers via OTA update is amazing and related to their culture. I don’t expected to see Ford or others follow suit. The only company that could possibly take this on IMO is VW because they’ve embraced EV beyond any other competitor with ground up new designs.

Oh wait.

The interface is actually running on your phone, but using your car's display as an external display and touch input device.

Any savings will be lost by one class action lawsuit or mass recall. Touch screen is the wrong interface when lives are on the line.

Not exactly a lawsuit but on the judicial axis.

Ford still has plenty of physical buttons. They haven't gone the Tesla route of making almost every function exclusively accessed by the touch screen. It looks to me like you can access most things you'd want to use while driving directly from the buttons on the steering wheel.

> "Distractions in the cab should be eliminated, not increased."

The ideal interface here is really good, interactive voice. Hands-free and eyes-free. Unfortunately, most in-car voice interfaces aren't quite their yet, including Tesla's.

Let me guess: your native language is American English and you have no "weird" accent.

Fwiw my car always thinks I’m trying to call someone or listen to obscure 60s pop, when all I want is to adjust the AC

It's only ideal when voice recognition is on the level of having a small conversation with the car, not brandishing commands like I never do in real life. It feels unnatural, and I suffer from the same issue as you and the other commenter in the thread: Siri, Google Voice, Alexa, etc., all have some issue with my accent and I don't even have a thick accent. It's absolutely infuriating to use voice assistants like that, missing 5% of the commands is worse than missing 50% because then I'm always on edge if the next command will be recognised or not.

I've always tried voice assistance, since the first time I could use one around 2005, so far I have absolutely no desire or use for them as the technology keeps just getting in the way instead of helping me out. Not even to set alarms or timers it's good enough, the feedback loop is too long and I prefer to just do 2-3 taps on a screen instead.

No, voice control - including Siri - is more dangerous than driving at the legal (UK) drink limit and worse than texting in Siri's case. Several studies have found this. Tesla is amount the worst. It's a very common misconception that voice use is safe but it really isn't. It should be banned. We have much safer and well-tested systems in good old buttons..

https://www.caradvice.com.au/312763/automotive-voice-recogni...

https://www.iamroadsmart.com/campaign-pages/end-customer-cam...

But I can't imagine any reason why, in the future, a good natural voice interface (Siri level or better) would require any more "mental effort" than having a conversation with someone in your passenger seat.

(The studies you link are referring to the distractions of in-car entertainment systems in general, not specifically the voice interface. The problem is really that drivers are taking their eyes off the road for extended periods to operate the touch screen, which wouldn't be necessary if the voice interface was capable enough)