And a car 10 years ago at the same price point seems so much more dated.
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a32254313/1960s-porsche-91...
I test drove the upgraded trim package. It was nicer in every way but the damn touch screen, which was a non-starter. I had to wait three months for a cheaper car to come in, instead of buying the upgraded package on the spot.
At some point a manufacturer will get wise and start selling manual controls as an upgrade.
Software wise it's a complete mess. The software itself is actually pretty OK, the navigation is just very verbose and it's strange that I can't just update it myself. The startup is also quite annoying. It's an embedded computer in a car, it should be instant.
Android auto support is a trashfire. It occasionally (when i drive for more than an hour) crashes the entire infotainment system, forcing it to reboot (a 1 minute process). Thankfully it resumes from where it left off after the reboot.
Well that's disappointing. As I pointed out in another comment, as of March 2020, Android Auto became wildly unstable in my 2015 Mazda. However, I put the blame on it having a version of Mazda AIO Tweaks from 2018, and possible version incompatibilities with the Android Auto on my phone. But... perhaps there are software issues at a deeper level here, if even the newer ones which officially support Android Auto are so unstable!
For me, Android Auto will crash frequently if using maps or Pandora, and will almost always crash instantly if I try to use both. It wasn't nearly as unstable before March 2020, though.
It is a touch screen, but the "touch" part generally only operates while stopped and in navigation. I think they might also allow touch for android auto/apple car play, but I'm not sure.
No, they don't allow any touchscreen input on AA even when parked.
I too had problems with Android Auto when using my old phone, it constantly crashed. When I switched to a Pixel 4a in 2020 I no longer had any issues. It works like a charm.
So I suspect it could be your phone, or something related (the cable, the type of USB plug, etc.).
Either way, it's branded "Android Auto". I'm going to blame Google for anything that doesn't work optimally. If they cared, they could certify their product.
Specifically running Android Auto became more unstable in March 2020, without being the head unit updated. In other words, probably the phone (Android Auto) was updated. Possibly in a way that was backwards compatible with OEM Android Auto, but not the AIO Tweaks version.
That's a long of saying, there's probably multiple potential sources of problems and failure; not clearly the hardware/software of the head unit, and not clearly the Android Auto software. But a bad combination of the two.
But it's all guesswork on my end! When I see others having the same issues with OEM Android Auto, it does make it seem more of a clear Android Auto software issue. (And we haven't really ruled out idiosyncrasies of the handsets and USB cables.)
All US cars now come with a screen, because backup cameras are now legally required. So I guess most of them say if there has to be a screen anyway, of course it should be a touch screen with controls, or it's just sitting there useless when you're not using the backup camera.
I don't want a backup camera or a screen at all, but if I have to have one, at least don't make it a touch screen, please.
I'd recommend giving Mazda's infotainment a chance. It's not pretty, but it gets out of your way enough that you get to enjoy the car. That was kinda the point of getting a miata in the first place.
That was nice. Hopefully, some manufacturer will cater to the touchscreen backlash crowd,and it'll become popular.
I guess that makes sense -- I'm kind of surprised it's legal!
although I guess the windshield-mount rearview mirror isn't actually legally required anyway, for instance in trucks/vans/other situations with obstructed sightlines to back of car.
Anyway, what you describe sounds really cool and subtle in a good way, like the kind of thing we imagined we'd get in the future, when we imagined the future would be designed well, instead of the hacky poorly designed terrible UX future we've got.
You don't normally find this a problem with windshield-mounted mirrors? I wonder what the difference is, and if you'd get used to it if driving regularly.
I don't notice a focus change going from looking out the windshield to looking through the mirror. There almost certainly is one, but it's not as drastic, because you don't focus on the surface of the mirror... and, as you note, it's what I'm used to.
Now, I don't think you need to get this exactly right, but if you could make the video image appear at a focal depth close to to the length from the mirror to the back window, it would be a lot easier on the eyes than the image appearing at a focal depth of about a foot. I'm not good with optics though, so don't ask me how to do that! :D
Will they really?
Most consumers invest very little effort in researching most of their purchases, and are remarkably tolerant to specific kinds of annoyances. I wish that they invested more effort, but based on my observations of my friends and family (who will spend e.g. about 20 minutes researching their $600 phone purchase), they won't, with a few outliers.
An imperfect comparison might be the amount of effort that the average techie spends on purchasing a MicroSD card or USB drive (usually on Amazon). How many people, even programmers, will spend time looking for durability or third-party performance benchmarking numbers? How many will look for child/slave labor in the manufacturing of the device, or rare earth materials sourced from areas in conflict?
I, personally, know that I should do the above, but I don't - partially because Google is so incredibly bad at finding the information, but also because I know that because most other people don't care, a lot of the above information might not exist at all.
I try to view it instead as being paid (albeit at a lower rate) for my off time. (And if you do this for everything, you'll tend to spend less, have more in the bank, and the amount you get 'paid' will increase over time.)
That said, it's regulation which has driven the present problem....
An average car lasts 12 years. How many 12 year old tablets do people want to use?
My first car was a 15 year old beater with a tape deck. It was trivial to rip it out and put in an (at the time current) CD player. I pity the poor kids who are going to be stuck with these cars down the road.
One off-the-shelf touchscreen... vs. lots of little custom-molded and printed analog parts that have to be assembled by costly robots or costlier humans. Big savings, I think.
Whatever the case, it sure isn't because people like touch controls in their cars. Holy shit, what a universally reviled "feature."
There is always custom engineering to match the customer's housing and bezel, tune the analog characteristics to the electrical environment, and handle other requests like a safer/thicker cover glass, optical bonding to the LCD, and low friction or hydro/oleophobic coatings on the surface.
You didn't mention UI design, which is the worst aspect of this technology.
So I'm stuck with laggy, buggy, bad software and a stupid touchscreen full of features that I will never use.
Seriously, who needs to be able to play movies in their car's center front console?
>The automatic climate control system offers a high-tech touch-screen interface...
https://automobiles.honda.com/hr-v#interior
I'm of the opinion that the only touchscreen that belongs in a car is a barebones non-networked Apple CarPlay / Android Auto pass-through for sound and navigation. All other controls are physical.
Ever since radios stopped being a standard rectangle, and the dashboard was filled with kevlar sacks and explosives there's nowhere to put anything down.
No clue if that's still true; I think it has become less true over time for sure.
There are benefits to automakers for retaining that standard form factor. Most factory-branded infotainment systems are made by a handful of OEM manufacturers like Bose. Bose makes systems for multiple automakers. So the double-DIN form factor has persisted, it's just hidden.
Problem is, for most cars, the climate controls and shit are all bundled into that infotainment system. So you can slot a standard double-DIN stereo into most modern cars, but you need a replacement dashboard panel and fairly elaborate kit to replace the OEM climate controls and whatever else.
Metra is a company that makes those kits, I think they were pretty much the only game in town last I looked into this. https://www.crutchfield.com/S-57MGZyBW0Mm/fg_112200_FFBrand%...
There is a touchscreen. IMO, you want that for Apple CarPlay / Android Auto. Mostly for nav.
But for everything else, there are big grippy analog controls. There are also analog volume and prev/next controls for the touchscreen. I believe the interior was designed with the concept of, "everything should be operable, even if the driver is wearing gloves."
More importantly, federal law requires that new cars must have back-up cameras. Car manufacturers are doing the obvious analysis of, if we need to have a screen in there anyway, may as well make it a touchscreen. And if we're going to make it a touchscreen, may as well save some money by eliminating a bunch of physical controls.
I don't like it—I plan to drive my 2002 Tacoma into the ground specifically to avoid getting a car with a huge touchscreen UI—but I kind of understand it.
Why is this? You'd think these massive corporations could afford the best SWE's in the world. And yet, the average infotainment system in a new car today is literally worse than an iPad from 2010.
Also, infotainment is not a make-or-break feature of the car. It might nudge people a little, but it’s not the thing, so it’s not as high a priority.
I will say for my former employer that I could get a better salary at almost any software company than there. The work was interesting though.
A lot of automakers leave too much to their suppliers, and take too much on faith. The testing and validation is often happy-path only, show that it is capable of functioning properly, not that's incapable of functioning improperly. Pathetic but thrifty, as long as there are no standards for these things.
Mazda's gaffe here is that the boot-loop prevents the rear-view camera from working, which is a NHTSA requirement. So their 'courtesy replacement' is an attempt to avoid the shame of a true recall, as I understand it.
SWEs working at these companies are probably hamstrung in what they can do.
From cheap economobiles to six figure luxury cars, I've yet to see an infotainment system that works better than CarPlay.
The last bastion for factory infotainment systems is that CarPlay/Android Auto doesn't integrate with factory HUD or instrument panel displays (whether the instrument panel is a big LCD itself, or a small one nestled between the gauges). But I hear even this is changing in some recent models. Once that revolution is finished, then I don't see why I'd ever use the factory infotainment software ever again instead of just CarPlay.
It's amazing. Maintenance is cheap, stuff works. I have a Bluetooth FM radio dongle, and the audio quality is less than ideal, but my speakers are crap too, so who cares. I threw on a dash mount for my phone to do navigation and music, and it's wayyyy better than even decks with Apple CarPlay or Android Auto (particularly since most of that stuff, until very recently, required you to plug in a cable).
I'm going to drive the thing into the ground. Really not looking forward to the idea of buying a car full of computers to replace it.
That being said, fuel economy isn't _great_. If the odometer is to be trusted I get around 25 mpg, but I don't drive all that much, and I just don't think a hybrid or electric vehicle is worth the price, both upfront (particularly in this market) and maintenance (for the hybrids only, electrics seem to be maintenance-free).
If they shit on them too much then they risk getting banned.
That's all I need, my phone apps and interface update just fine and are pretty good at doing the things I want.
Some day, I hope a lawyer will team up with a UI researcher, and then sue car manufactures for "safety theater" features like this that endanger people.
One of my favorites? The click through legal disclaimer that blocks my view of the backup camera screen every single time I pull out of a spot in a parking lot.
A runner up is "we can't let the passenger type a destination into the navigation system because the vehicle is moving"
So far, everything that my car replaces with a touchscreen that used to be a physical switch is a complete downgrade.
My car features a D-pad on the wheel that also works if you swipe over it, resulting in bad inputs and causing all kinds of frustration. It's my first new car and I'm feeling like I want my old car back. I seriously hate touchscreen controls and my only physical input is faulty