It's early to be warning of extinction, but buttons are hard to find in some new cars. Given that a screen has to go into the dashboard anyway, and the fact that people won't consider a car without Apple or Android Auto, touchscreens make life easier for manufacturers.
They don't make it easy for drivers. We're treated to bad interface that doesn't create muscle memory but instead distracts us while we should be driving. The data to prove it has been found by the Swedish magazine.
A list of tasks in a Volvo C70 was compared to a list of tasks in 11 new cars. Increasing the cabin temperature, adjusting the radio, turning off the screen, and dimming the instruments were some of the things that were included.
It was the old Volvo that won. The tasks are done in ten seconds and the car is driven at a speed of over 100 km/h. Most of the other cars needed more time to complete the same tasks.
The drivers had time to get to know the cars and their systems before the test began, according to VB. With my devil's advocate hat on, most drivers who drive regularly will regularly drive the same car, building more familiarity over time than a journalist will after a week with a new model. Good design should be the opposite of that kind of long-term adaptation.
AdvertisementDesigners who want a clean interior with minimal switchgear are the reason for the shift from botton to screens. I don't think we can count on the accountants. The company doesn't have to pay for the plastic and wires that buttons are made from or the time it takes someone to install them in a car if everything can be accomplished by touching the screen.
We can see in the spread of scores that different all-touch cars that design matters. In our review, we said that the lack of buttons in the Model 3 was a problem, but both cars performed well in the tests.
The BMW iX scored well, but you're not obligated to use it, even though it has a touchscreen. There are permanent controls under a small piece of wood that both looks and feels interesting. It's an early implementation of a design trend the company calls shy tech and I'm looking forward to seeing it evolve in the future.
There are examples of the auto industry doing this better. Over the last couple of weeks, I've spent time in the Acura MDX and Mazda CX-50, neither of which has a touch screen in the dashboard. The CX-50 did a better job of differentiating itself from the rest when it came to the in-car entertainment system.
AdvertisementMazda's latest system has been criticized for being bare-bone, but it's actually quite easy to use with the rotary controller and its hard buttons, which is right where your right hand expects them to.
The Acura has a screen that isn't easy to reach. It's a much higher-resolution display compared to a much more expensive car, and the MDX's system is more capable than the CX-50's in terms of apps and features. Obviously, that's a pretty subjective thing, but I like the layout and fonts.
I don't want you to know the full extent of my feelings about Acura's "true touchpad," just a high level, mostly polite version. It doesn't work like any other trackpad in a car because it has a relationship between the screen and the pad. It requires a lot of concentration if you're trying to interact with the app. It doesn't make sense to say that concentration to use is the last quality anyone would want in an entertainment system.
I'm not surprised that the old Volvo won because it was from a time when most functions were controlled by individual buttons and when there wasn't a lot of information available. The tests played to its strengths, with the only safe way to see directions is if you bring a mount. If someone is sitting in the back seat, be careful what you say. In Volvos of that era, one of those buttons drops the rear headrests, which are heavy and wish to return to a horizontal orientation with absolute disregard for the skulls of anyone sitting in their way.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
