The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by rob74 on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @10:20AM (#31504899)

I think that's true only as long as the only electric cars you have driven are Teslas. The BMW i3 has pretty much resisted this tendency. Ok, it's already a pretty old design at this point and getting phased out, but it has lots of physical buttons (even for the seat warmer!). And I don't think electric cars that are variants of existing petrol cars (which are more and more common) will eliminate the physical controls just because they put an electric engine into the car. Or, otherwise said: if you buy an electric car from a tech company (or somebody trying too hard to emulate them), you get a touchscreen. If you buy an electric car from a car company, you get physical controls...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by franga2000 on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @10:41AM (#31505246)

I regularly drive a variety of electric cars (renault, smart, bmw, ford, VW) and besides the Smart For* series, which is cost-down so much that it doesn't even have a touchscreen, all of the cars have at least one feature available exclusively through the touchscreen. One of the most infuriating is Reanult's ZOË, which has really good physical controls for absolutely everything, except volume. That's the one not-driving-related thing I need to be able to adjust while moving! Even the 2008 Scenic dinosaur-burner that I stupidly bought during the pandemic has better controls than that...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by pnw on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @11:16AM (#31505757)

The Tesla Model S has a physical volume control on the steering wheel. I’m not sure about the other Tesla models.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by speedgoose on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @12:35PM (#31506875)

The Model 3 and the Model Y has one two. I would expect the Model X to have one as well. I’m not sure about the old roadster but the lotus interior was not high tech.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by olyjohn on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @06:29PM (#31511557)

The Lotus interior was one of the most glorious interiors of all time. Simple, light and somehow it was so ergonomic, you can road trip in it and not get sore and tired. A true driver-centric design.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by tomxor on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @10:38AM (#31505198)

Made me check that one out, it's actually not an insane price, it competes with most new normal-person petrol cars... I mean I still wouldn't buy one new, and that's still a bit of a dodgy range, but maybe in ten years there will finally be an affordable 2nd hand market and some infra to make it reliable. In the mean time I will continue to run my petrol car into the ground like a good holistic environmentalist.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by ThunderSizzle on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @12:13PM (#31506596)

Would anyone trust a 2nd hand market for an EV when the battery is basically guaranteed to be dead long before more affordable ICE vehicles?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by tomxor on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @12:49PM (#31507091)

It's a good point, a 2nd hand market assumes the availability of a cost effective battery replacement or serious maintenance scheme... it's not exactly on the same scale as a cam belt change which is the common todo upon acquiring a 2nd hand petrol car.

Also worth acknowledging that the battery makes up a huge chunk of the car both physically and in terms of cost, and yet is a consumable, so I guess this lowers the resale value of EVs significantly? I wonder if it's even worth any of the remaining savings on the rest of the car after fitting a new battery. Maybe the next stage is scaling up lithium-ion recycling to drive down battery replacement and general battery cost to a point that "everyone else" can join in the EV game.

It would be a big step backwards for society if a new wealth gap is created when oil becomes too expensive to continue running cheap ICE cars and only moderately wealthy people can afford cars priced exclusively at "new" values without a 2nd hand market.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by antisthenes on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @06:26PM (#31511513)

> It would be a big step backwards for society if a new wealth gap is created when oil becomes too expensive to continue running cheap ICE cars and only moderately wealthy people can afford cars priced exclusively at "new" values without a 2nd hand market.

That's coming whether you want to or not.

Once we start pricing in the externalities of climate change into road vehicles (which is beginning to happen, slowly), cars will become increasingly unaffordable to those in the bottom quartiles of income.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by speedgoose on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @12:37PM (#31506899)

The old EVs used market is dynamic in Norway.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by digisign on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @03:36PM (#31509463)

They are replaceable, are they not?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by sfink on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @12:29PM (#31506787)

Musk created a battery tech company and used it to power giant cellphones on wheels.

I don't want to drive—or negotiate with AI to drive—a giant cellphone on wheels.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces by yakshaving_jgt on Wednesday May 25, 2022 @02:21PM (#31508454)

> If you buy an electric car from a car company, you get physical controls...

Not sure I agree with that. Even Porsche are doing touch screens, unfortunately.

[ Parent | on HN ]