[HN Gopher] Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer ___________________________________________________________________ Ford F-150 Lightning: Fast Truck, Slow Computer Author : stalfosknight Score : 65 points Date : 2022-08-16 18:14 UTC (4 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.theverge.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.theverge.com) | ggm wrote: | What is the balance of experience between touch, | aural/tactile/visua push response on screens, and actual physical | buttons which go "click" and light up? | | I think the place we know most about this, is the Aircraft space. | I am interested because I used to live in 'press it go click' | world and now live half-blessed by a car with some controls which | are real and a lot of controls which are soft, and I have to say | I don't entirely like the experience. | | When you look at a Concorde control deck, its a 3 man (4 man?) | crew, and its unbelievably complex. The replacement in a current | spec Boeing or Airbus is simpler, but it's hardly one touch | screen. | | Tesla has gone off the deep end. | jconley wrote: | Can confirm. I have an F-150 Lightning. The UI sucks and is slow. | Much worse than my Teslas. It takes like 30 seconds when I get in | the truck and turn it on before it's even usable. Switching | between CarPlay and the native interface is ridiculous. It's a | great truck though. Love it. :) AMA. | rootusrootus wrote: | One of these days we will have big enough batteries to power a | superduty a reasonable distance. I can't wait. I've loved my | EVs, now I want that for my F250. | Rooster61 wrote: | It's incredibly frustrating to me that buying a vehicle with a | pushbutton, working, reliable interface is becoming increasingly | impossible to do. Why is UX so horrifically bad in the vehicle | space? Is it poor management decisions or a shortage of good UX | engineers? I get that lumping everything into the touchscreen can | be a cheaper option to build, but I'd GLADLY pay for a different | option. I don't understand it. | bonestamp2 wrote: | A lot of automakers are chasing Tesla's one screen design -- | they're so envious of the cost savings there. Except the | Germans, they're still putting in lots of buttons and knobs -- | my next car will likely be German because they seem to | understand what people actually want. | qbrass wrote: | Hope it's not a new Golf. VW did more damage to their | reputation with that interior than from Dieselgate. | CamperBob2 wrote: | Buy it quick. Even the Macan has a stupid piano-black console | touch panel in its current generation. | ct0 wrote: | My previous version Porsche (958) has a button for newly | every function. Its very similar to a small plane and it | 100% allows me to focus on the road and whats important | without looking at the change of function. | bonestamp2 wrote: | Ya, that's the fault of journalists always complaining | about "blank" panels. The former Porsche solution to that | was better than this new panel. | ajross wrote: | Have you driven a Tesla much? The general UX intent is that | you're not supposed to need to interact with the screen while | driving. Wipers are automatic, lights are automatic (both can | be pulsed with the stalks of course). Virtually everything | responds to voice commands ("Play Stairway to Heaven", | "Navigate to Albertsons", "Set temperature to 72", etc...). | All this stuff works really well. | | I won't engage with "what people actually want" except to | point to sales figures, I guess. Everyone likes different | stuff. But the point is that Tesla is winning in this space | because they're handing people an outside-the-box solution. | Asking for "lots of buttons and knobs" is just demanding the | older solution. That doesn't say the older solution is wrong, | but it does argue that maybe you're failing to understand the | new paradigm. | bjelkeman-again wrote: | I think it is because A)Good UX is hard and there is a shortage | of people who have experience a mixed hardware/software UX. B) | Car companies are rather old fashioned in setting their | priorities. They haven't caught on yet at management level that | the modern car is a different beast and needs different | priorities when designing and engineering. C) A car company is | big. It takes a long time to change, and a lot of people are | really sceptical and don't believe the future needs to be | different. | TylerE wrote: | None of that. | | Costs. | | Buttons are expensive, and additional points of failure. | Cheaper to just cram everything into a touchscreen. | guntars wrote: | Yet the cars are more expensive than ever. Nah, it's a bet by | the management that people don't actually choose a car based | on the polish of the infotainment system. | sliken wrote: | Maybe not, but I've done the opposite. The BMW, Subaru, and | Fords I tried had terrible interfaces and I ruled them out. | In particular BMW's i-drive seems to be hated by many. | | Tesla on the other hand has buttons for many things, horn, | turn signals, activate the windshield wipers for a moment | (I use auto that handles most needs), engage cruise | control, set following distance when using cruise control, | high beams, pause music, music volume, etc. | | Sure seat heaters, interior temp, ac, defrosting etc | require touch screen use (or leaving them on auto), but | those are emergencies and not much different than having to | hit one of 8 buttons/dials on a center console. Especially | since most are single touch, not touch -> select menu -> | hit button. | | While I find the above not annoying I really love the 15" | screen that devotes the majority of the screen to things | around the car (lane markers, cars, motorcycles, traffic | cones, trucks, pedestrians, etc) and the map (with | traffic). If the car sees a problem it blinks that object | red, which I find helpful. Sure if I want I can get an inch | for the current song. But generally I feel more | situationally aware with a nice big nav screen up. On more | than one occasion I've seen motorcycles splitting lanes | behind me because of motion on the screen before I notice | the noise or see them in the mirrors. I also really miss | the current speed limit on the screen when I switch cars. | | I also really like being able to say "play pink floyd", or | "navigate to ...". | TylerE wrote: | You're not really arguing with logic, there. How do you | know a car with lots of buttons wouldn't cost even more? | akira2501 wrote: | > Why is UX so horrifically bad in the vehicle space? | | It used to be that vehicle radio units were entirely | replaceable. There was a relatively healthy aftermarket, and | quite a few shops that would actually do the installations for | you. There used to be a lot more competition here, but I think | with the general increase in quality of speaker systems | combined with smart phones and the much higher level of system | integration through the head unit effectively killed it. | | Hence.. you get what you buy. In a sense, the manufacturer has | a monopoly on your dash that they didn't traditionally have. | mint2 wrote: | Cars seating is horrible and bad for backs. Trends, tradition | and short term cost decide most design considerations not | practicality or what's best. | kayodelycaon wrote: | Depends on the car and the person. I have back problems and | almost no office chairs are usable for me. I can easily drive | 10 hours in my car with no issues. Sometimes, my back feels | better after a drive that long. | bink wrote: | It reminds me of cell phone interfaces back before the iPhone. | I had high hopes that Carplay would motivate the vendors to put | some effort into their own interfaces but sadly that doesn't | appear to have happened. | bowsamic wrote: | The entire auto industry is driven by hype and trends rather | than functionality | 7952 wrote: | Yes. Just look at the appalling forward blind spot on a lot | of trucks and SUVs. Or the way cars have become taller at the | expense of aerodynamics. | lotsofpulp wrote: | People like sitting higher up, or do not like being seated | lower, or so much lower, than others. | | It might also be safer to be in a higher up car in the | event of a collision. | | Pretty much all the families I know with young kids and | toddlers has a full size SUV. Every time I ask why they did | not get a minivan such as Odyssey or Sienna, every response | is they like SUVs and do not want to sit lower in the | minivan. Even though the minivan has better fuel economy, | seats more people with more legroom, and has more cargo | space, the answer is still SUV is cooler than minivans. | | I even see families who live with elderly parents prefer to | drive two SUVs (or 1 SUV and 1 pickup truck) somewhere with | 3 to 4 people in each, rather than have one minivan to be | able to transport all 7 or 8 at the same time. And these | same families growing up went everywhere in minivans | because it was the most economic way, but now that they can | afford SUVs, that is what they choose to use. | LAC-Tech wrote: | > People like sitting higher up, or do not like being | seated lower, or so much lower, than others. | | Most of my driving is on country roads in a mountainous | area, with some very tight turns. | | I'm going to rent out an SUV soon and see what it's like | taking sharp turns with a high vehicle. I suspect it | sucks but who knows. | davidw wrote: | This "arms race" is piling up stacks and stacks of | bodies. | 7952 wrote: | I know two couples who both started out with small | efficient cars. And then had to upgrade because they | could not fit a stroller in the back. It feels like car | companies just want to have skews that are intentionally | compromised to push people into the next tier. When most | people just need a compact sedan. | LAC-Tech wrote: | I can fit a stroller in the back of my subcompact. | | Granted I'm not able to go grocery shopping at the same | time.. | lotsofpulp wrote: | Yet most people who can afford to, choose to buy larger | vehicles than they need. | | Car manufacturers are not shaping people's desires, they | are simply delivering them what they want. | | A Corolla/civic continues to be available for purchase. | Yet people want to sit higher up, so you see the vast | increase in sales for RAV4/CRV. | | https://www.statista.com/statistics/276506/change-in-us- | car-... | WorldMaker wrote: | The corolla/civic buyers seem to be on a longer planning | horizon than the RAV4/CRV buyers. It's tough to compare | sales apples to sales oranges when new car buyers on | average buy sedans on 10-15 year schedules and SUVs on | roughly 5 year schedules. | | That planning horizon differential alone is enough to | explain why car manufacturers would be greater | incentivized to iterate on SUVs faster than sedans and | include more features. Iteration and feature | differentials will contribute as much to sales choices as | "sit higher up" will, acting as a reinforcement in the | cycle/spiral towards larger vehicles. | | Car manufacturers aren't incentivized enough to lengthen | their own planning horizons or otherwise better | accommodate "sensible" sedan drivers, and it becomes very | easy to pretend they don't exist and chase the short-term | profits of the faster cycle time (especially when pushed | by quarterly-earnings focused shareholders). | jackmott wrote: | nine_k wrote: | I wonder if third-party infotainment with buttons and otherwise | ergonomic, reliable UI is legally possible. If so, it could be | a viable business? | subsubzero wrote: | I don't know if its just me but electric trucks/cars and the | buying experience there is one giant pit of frustration. I want | to buy a electric truck, was thinking of a Rivian, but good luck | getting one in the next 2-3 years. And if you do manage to get | one watch out for your axel coming apart! [1], maybe I will get a | lightning, looks like same leadtime issues, 2 years+ wait and | they are totally changing the brain(from ford to android) so the | ones now will be obsolete. | | Also from tesla to rivian all I hear are horror stories about the | service, and tesla's build quality is nowhere near any of the | traditional automakers(fit and finish). I just want to buy a | reliable electric truck or suv that has a decent finish and don't | want to wait 2-3 years, someone please take my money! | | [1] - https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/threads/rivian-r1t-cv- | axl... | rnk wrote: | There's one thing you can do to have a shot at getting a rivian | quicker. Spec one out that matches the current launch edition | (4 motors, don't get the ocean coast interior, get the tonneau | cover) and you might just get one. People have gotten them in a | couple of months, but they are lucky. Go to the | reddit.com/r/rivian forum and read people's descriptions. What | seems to happen is they have some ready for a location and | someone at the last minute drops out and they can't find | someone so they can go way down the list quickly. | treesknees wrote: | What you're asking for just doesn't exist yet. The marketing | teams at these companies are clearly doing a great job selling | these vehicles as reliable simple alternatives to ICE-powered, | but that's just not the case. | | Ignoring all of the supply-chain issues from the pandemic | lockdowns (shipping, chip shortages, labor shortages, etc.) | you're still purchasing new technology that will take years to | iron out the quality problems. I've friends who work in the | automotive industry in various engineering roles and none of | them are driving brand-new platforms because they know better. | Just like the software world, manufacturers will take all of | the maintenance data from dealerships and use it to improve the | design and production. If you're OK with being the beta tester | filing bug reports in this relationship, by all means, buy an | electric truck. | rnk wrote: | I'll agree with that. Yet I alsonever want to buy anything | from an enforced middleman again. First I avoided that with | Tesla, and now I did it with Rivian. It does have some bugs, | so did my last car I bought 20 years ago form a major | manufacturer. | croutonwagon wrote: | The enforced middle man gives you a place to hold | accountable or to physically complain to. And provides | local jobs. Not to mention the infrastructure to handle | things like recalls. | | People complain about Tesla service but actively want MORE | faceless corps not held accountable to sell them things. It | makes no sense. | kcb wrote: | Hold accountable a local area businessman with political | connections. What could possibly go wrong? | kodah wrote: | > The result is that the software experience of the Lightning | often feels trapped in the past, with no clear path to the future | because Ford's real software efforts lie elsewhere. | | I have a Ford Fusion. The software has remained essentially | untouched since I bought it. They rely almost entirely on Android | Auto, which has it's own host of bugs and incompatibilities. | | There's a primary learning from Tesla to be made here: | infotainment is a core part of the business. Build it in house. | itsoktocry wrote: | > _Ford's entire suite of driver-assistance tech is called | "BlueCruise," which is deeply confusing because it means that | everything from boring old cruise control to full-on hands-free | driving is technically "BlueCruise."_ | | This seems far less confusing than the Autopilot and FSD | bifurcation that Tesla has. | | It beeps at you to get your hands on the wheel when you're trying | to autosteer in places it's not allowed. Sounds reasonable, no? | warty_affrays wrote: | Do you think it would be more or less confusing if Autopilot | and FSD were both called them same name? | [deleted] | johnklos wrote: | Android? So now our cars will stop working and/or will become | hopelessly insecure when Google and Ford decide to stop updating | them? | SiempreViernes wrote: | Wait, there exists mass market cars with secure software? | johnklos wrote: | pkulak wrote: | I'm firmly in the camp that it's not patriotic to stylize the | American flag in any way... but I'd love it if you expanded | on how this version is racist. | LeoPanthera wrote: | The "thin blue line" flag is used almost exclusively by the | far-right, and more specifically by white supremacists. | | The flag on the Lightning isn't that flag, but it does | resemble it. | namecheapTA wrote: | And here I was thinking it was used by people that | appreciate their local police force and understand the | stresses they are under. | pkulak wrote: | Oh interesting. Just looked it up, and the thin blue line | flag is black and white. Don't think I've ever seen a | black and white American flag before. | davidw wrote: | I'm not up on all the details, but those grayed out flags | do seem to have some particular associations. Nothing | wrong with a regular old flag IMO. | tablespoon wrote: | > ...the Mustang Mach-E and the Lightning have a 15.5-inch | portrait center screen running Sync 4A, which is the same as Sync | 4 with the addition of touchscreen climate controls and widgets | that fill out the vertical height of the display. | | Why??? Climate controls should not be on a touchscreen. Display | is fine, but control is not. Just leave space for some knobs and | a mode switch. | foxyv wrote: | I don't know about the F150 Lightning, but the Fords I've seen | all use a HOTAS style setup where the climate, radio, etc... | are all controlled by buttons on the steering wheel. The | touchscreen is more for passengers. | russb wrote: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HOTAS | | "HOTAS, an acronym of hands on throttle-and-stick" | bri3d wrote: | It's been 10+ years since cars have gotten screwed in the | Consumer Reports and other outlets for bad infotainment. | | What's the fix? VW's MIB2/MIB2.5 was pretty much the pinnacle of | automotive head unit innovation, IMHO, and it wasn't due to the | technology - it's QNX and J9 Java like so many head units before | it. It just... worked, which seems a bridge too far for modern | infotainment. | | I think C+D and other outlets need to start scoring cars based on | their head units, or at least considering them. Much like tires, | it's clear that these venues have enough power to bend the | industry to some extent. | WhitneyLand wrote: | Any way to wire up 3rd party hardware buttons / switchgear? | | I don't know if there's any API access for non-critical | functionality like climate control. | throw03172019 wrote: | They strapped on an Android tablet and called it a day. From my | experience (ex-mobile game dev, Medical SaaS), Android tablets | are very slow. We encourage our customers to not buy Android | tablets because the patient experience is not the greatest. | pkulak wrote: | It has to be an automotive-grade screen or one afternoon in a | Phoenix parking lot will be the end of it. It's absolutely not | a tablet, or even a part from one. | markus92 wrote: | Not even Android, according to the article. That's coming next | year, now it's a proprietary Ford system. | sjm-lbm wrote: | Current versions of the Ford infotainment platform are based on | QNX, actually. The article mentions that Ford is switching to | Android, but that hasn't happened yet. | HWR_14 wrote: | Why is Ford switching away from a RTOS with a great history | in the automotive space to try to force me to have something | to do with Google? | rektide wrote: | Because there's a vibrant ecosystem around Android with | wonderful third party support, with a rich platform & | ecosystem already well known & loved by many developers & | consumers alike. Where-as QNX is a toolkit for building | one-off custom appliances that no third party will ever see | or improve or enrich. One is a dead end stuck in a niche, | the other realized it had to create more value than it | captured. And generally the Google open ecosystem one is | pretty ok. | HWR_14 wrote: | Why would I want third party support, a rich platform or | an ecosystem? I want a radio and something that plays | what my cellphone tells it. That's it. | uncletaco wrote: | Well that's you, somebody else might want to use the | subscription music service they pay for and use car | controls to change the tracks, someone else might want a | map that displays in the center console as opposed to | their phone, etc etc. With android there's the | possibility of adding apps that people would want to the | car itself. This would be something device manufacturers | could be interested in for dash cams or other electronics | that could benefit from richer control interfaces. | NotYourLawyer wrote: | Android is cheaper because it hoovers up the "owner's" | data. | rnk wrote: | That may be, but it wins because it's vastly better than | all the alternatives, except tesla or a few other leading | 'new car companies' like rivian. | HWR_14 wrote: | How on earth is it "better"? Dumb cars are better. | Obviously, I want the EV to have mission critical things | related to it being an EV, but there's no reason for | anything else to get fancy. | | Tesla has the worst cockpit experience because it's a | single large screen. | prepend wrote: | It's not as good as my dumb bmw "connected drive" from 5 | years ago. | ubermonkey wrote: | This is one of those things I'll never experience, and doubly so: | I have no use for a truck (I live in a city), and I have never | owned or wanted to own an American-made car. They're just all so | _bad_. | [deleted] | prepend wrote: | > but also a stopgap as Ford resets its entire software strategy | around Android in partnership with Google. | | This doesn't seem like a good idea because there are Android | people and iOS people. Alienating a large swath of customers is | not a good idea. | | That and I don't want Google monitoring all my car data. One of | the big reasons I don't have a Tesla is their data policy. But | I'd rather Tesla have my data than Google because at least it | won't be linked to everything else about me. | | Also, I want to drive cars for 10 or 20 years. Google has never | maintained Android for that long. | | I'd rather just have an embedded os written and maintained by | ford (that doesn't suck). | ledauphin wrote: | no car company "maintains" their embedded software, either. | | updates do happen, but there are no guarantees, no | transparency, and essentially no aftermarket options for most | modern cars. | olivermarks wrote: | Right now automotive UI's and sw are in the equivalent of pre | iphone era mobile phone jankyness, just good at one or two things | with a ton of cruft that doesn't work well. | | We all know BEVs are fast - even a 1960's UK electric milkfloat | is amazingly speedy from standstill - but I'd say Ford are years | away from their BEVs being viable and reliable, not least due to | lack of charging network. The lousy towing performances on BEV | trucks rings alarm bells too. | https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/ford-f150-lightning-elect... | | A little off topic but it appears Anne Heche's vehicle was a | hybrid or BEV and caused a huge fire, one of my biggest BEV | concerns - It took nearly 60 firefighters more than an hour to | douse the flames. | | https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/202... | recursive wrote: | Anecdotal, but I just drove my electric Ford from Sacramento to | Seattle and back without any particular planning or problems. | Just used the built-in nav to find chargers. | olivermarks wrote: | truck or car? loaded or empty? | cpwright wrote: | The lousy towing performance probably doesn't matter. 75% of | truck owners tow one time a year or less. I've had my F-150 for | 8 years 45,000 miles, and it's seen a trailer 3 times for a | total of less than 400 miles. I'm close to being in the market | for a new truck, and the biggest deal breaker for me with the | lightning is the 5.5' box instead of the 6.5' box. Weighing | over 6,000 lbs also means you can't register it as a passenger | vehicle in NYS without capping it - meaning you can't drive on | the parkways. | | https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-siz... | rnk wrote: | There were news articles that they revised this law for the | rivian and presumably the f150ev. At first people ran into | this weight / registration issue. | matwood wrote: | I want my next truck to be an EV, but towing does matter to | me. I hope by the time I replace my 2007 Tundra there will be | an EV truck that does tow well. I just broke 130k miles, and | easily have another 100k, so I have some time. | twobitshifter wrote: | With the performance of this and other EVs now beating the Raptor | pickup, do you think we'll start to see performance regulated for | safety reasons? A massive pickup able to 0-60 in a few seconds is | cool, but in the hands of the less responsible it sounds like a | huge safety risk. We cap the performance of tiny scooters but | multiton trucks are able to go as fast as humanly possible? | davidw wrote: | Massive, heavy trucks with a blind spot, the ability to | accelerate very rapidly, and a fiddly screen that you need to | use even for the most basic of things like heating and cooling. | | What could possibly go wrong... | [deleted] | namecheapTA wrote: | Atleast when a Dodge Charger is charging up from behind, I can | hear the thing. Pedestrians can hear the thing. | | When the demographic that currently commits most reckless | driving eventually adopts electric cars, it's going to be a | blood bath. | kkfx wrote: | Cars OEMs know (in general, more or less) how to build cars. In | electronics tend to be crappy at best in IT terms they are like | classic dumb users, except they actually design crapware. | | It's not much Ford, it's ANY OEMs I know of... | bottlepalm wrote: | (except Tesla who actually has their own hardware, software, | dev team and frequently pushes updates for years) | colechristensen wrote: | Do fleet versions of new cars/trucks also have stupid | touchscreens in them? | | Like a new F-450, is it driven by a shitty android tablet too? | r00fus wrote: | Does it do CarPlay/Android Auto? If that's the case, I honestly | don't really care how fast it is - I have an older EV with Sync3 | and it's fine (more than fine, I just use my smartphone for most | interactions using CarPlay). | | The only thing I may dislike is not having physical buttons/dials | for climate. | aaronbrethorst wrote: | this is addressed in the article. You can just Cmd/Ctrl+F for | the word CarPlay for an answer. There's a | quick action button to navigate back home on the map widget, | but it just opens the map app full-screen, defeating the | purpose of the widget entirely. I'd love to have CarPlay open | to handle my phone and messaging alongside the radio, but | that's not possible, even though the display is clearly big | enough to show both at once. All of that is made | worse by how slow everything is. Switching between the radio | and the map or the map and CarPlay is... slow. Swiping along | the cards is pretty slow. The display can be responsive, and | the games are certainly playable, but in most instances, it's | just slow. This is the point in any car review | where many people are already drafting emails to me about just | using CarPlay or Android Auto instead of the stock software, | but friends, CarPlay and Android Auto are not good at helping | EV owners navigate charging. If you want to plot out a route | with accurate range estimates and an effective charging | strategy, you have to use the built-in nav -- especially since | Ford has taken the time to organize charging stations by speed, | and seeking out 150kW fast chargers is an important part of the | Lightning experience because the battery is so big. Apple and | Google are a long way behind on this front. | master_crab wrote: | "If you want to plot out a route with accurate range | estimates and an effective charging strategy, you have to use | the built-in nav" | | I saw that phrase in the story and came here to comment and | saw this thread. | | I think we should be honest with ourselves about recent | history: Apple and Google will be quicker to roll out | functionality for EV specific navigation (i.e. chargers) in | their apps then car manufacturers will be to fix their UI | problems. | | Edit: I also dont want to spend $xxx a year on map updates | from manufacturers when Apple Maps are free (I understand I'm | not the customer with Google even if their mapping product is | great) and better | filoleg wrote: | > _I think we should be honest with ourselves about recent | history: Apple and Google will be quicker to roll out | functionality for EV specific navigation (i.e. chargers) in | their apps then car manufacturers will be to fix their UI | problems._ | | I think you are missing the point of what the actual | problem here is. Apple and Google already show EV charging | stations on their maps just fine, you can even filter by | type of charging (CCS, CHADeMO, etc.). That's not the | issue. | | The issue is the navigation system using information about | your vehicle in real time (current outside temperature[0], | battery charge remaining, speed, AC usage, calculated | estimate of distance of range remaining using all the info | above, etc.) to automatically create a route to your final | destination that includes charging station stops on the | way. To calculate the frequency of those stops, locations, | how long you will need to spend charging there in the most | optimal way (e.g., it is actually much faster to make 2 | stops to charge from 15% to 50% than to stop 1 time to | charge from 15% to to 85%), you need real time data about | your own vehicle specifically. | | Unless Google and Apple somehow get access to that live | data from the vehicle itself in real time, that | functionality is impossible to implement. And, naturally, | the only entity that would have that info is the car nav | system itself. Plus, I don't think many users would be | enthusiastic about sharing such sensitive information with | Apple or Google. | | 0. In case anyone is curious why outside temperature is | relevant, EVs take outside temperature into their | calculation of estimated range, because lower temperatures | reduce range available. | kevinsundar wrote: | It's coming: | https://www.gearpatrol.com/cars/a40217409/new-apple- | carplay/ | filoleg wrote: | Thanks for the link. I had no idea CarPlay was not only | planning to go in that direction, but have already done | the work to make it happen, and are fairly close to | releasing it soon. Their car manufacturer partnerships | look pretty solid as well. | | Still, late 2023 as of now seems a bit far out. But I | don't think that majority of car manufacturers will | manage to get to the CarPlay level of quality for their | own in-house infotainment systems even by 2033. | master_crab wrote: | You got there in the end ;) | vel0city wrote: | EVs with Google's software native like the Polestar have | that functionality. Google Maps _can_ do it, its more of | a limitation of the current Android Auto implementation. | | I wonder if Android Auto would be able to get this data | with the current structure of Android Auto, or if | existing cars would never be able to support it. | causi wrote: | _I also dont want to spend $xxx a year on map updates from | manufacturers when Apple Maps are free (I understand I'm | not the customer with Google even if their mapping product | is great) and better_ | | I visibly jerked in my chair reading that from remembering | all the GPS devices I relied on for years that happily | bricked themselves after the company stopped supporting | them and their internal maps "expired". | rnk wrote: | Tesla gave free map updates. It seems everything is much | better if you just move away from the legacy automakers | for ui. | eneumann wrote: | As a cyclist, I'm super excited about one day being run over by | one of these things. The giant vehicle trend is getting a lot of | people killed. | | And why does any vehicle need to accelerate that quickly? It's | irresponsible on public roads. I would really love to see | acceleration and speed limiters on vehicles. | _dain_ wrote: | agreed on everything except acceleration | andrewla wrote: | Generally speaking the horrifying quality of Ford's electronics | have been enough to keep me away from even considering purchasing | one. Absolutely nothing works right and certainly nothing works | well. It may or may not be able to connect bluetooth, it may or | may not acknowledge a USB device, it may or may not start blaring | whatever FM station was last tuned in for no reason on startup, | or start playing the first album on your phone. Phone audio will | sometimes play as media, and sometimes show up as phone calls. | And of course, cripplingly slow, which for a touchscreen is | deadly -- you have no idea whether or not the system even | realized that you pressed it, and when you mash the button more | than once you may find that you've clicked a button on a not-yet- | visible-screen. Absolute garbage. | | Mazda is apparently taking the right approach here -- increasing | the tactile buttons on the dash and console, and ditching | touchscreens. | | Really, cars should just have a built-in phone mount and | connectors, and just let the phone do pretty much everything. If | Ford wants to have a map of charging stations, partner with Apple | or Google (or Waze) or build their own OSM-based maps app. Apple | CarPlay and Android Auto are okay-ish, but frankly I find the | experience of just having the phone on a mount and using that as | the display to be far superior in almost every way. | pkulak wrote: | Doesn't the article literally mentioning them partnering with | Google and using Android Automotive instead of their own UI? | I'd guess they know all too well about everything you mentioned | and have given up. | NotYourLawyer wrote: | They may have given up, but you can't buy the new version | yet. | PaulWaldman wrote: | >Mazda is apparently taking the right approach here -- | increasing the tactile buttons on the dash and console, and | ditching touchscreens. | | Huh? After using both Ford's (2022 Explorer) and Mazda's (2022 | CX-7) infotainment systems recently for several weeks, I | couldn't disagree more. | | Android Auto and CarPlay interfaces were designed for | touchscreen control. Mazda forcing the use of a wheel, like a | joystick is a safety hazard. Turing the wheel unpredictably | selects objects on the screen, forcing you to keep your eyes | off the road while you keep turning the wheel until the item | you need is selected. In Ford's system, a quick glace us all | that's required. | | What good is tactile feedback when you have no idea what you're | adjusting without staring at the screen? | wyldfire wrote: | I have a 2020 Mazda 6 and I love the safety focus of its | infotainment. But the ludicrously bad latency is infuriating. | Button presses - especially <change radio station +/-> will | sometimes get buffered for 10/20s and sometimes they're | ignored altogether. | genocidicbunny wrote: | > Turing the wheel unpredictably selects objects on the | screen, forcing you to keep your eyes off the road while you | keep turning the wheel until the item you need is selected. | | You shouldn't need to do anything requiring the wheel while | you're driving though. All the controls that you would want | to have accessible while you're driving are physical (climate | control, basic media/phone controls.) For everything else you | should be setting that up while you're parked. | elzbardico wrote: | Usually me an my wife take turns driving. And we have a | tacit agreement that the passenger control this kind of | stuff. So, if I am driving, I ask my wife to set a | destination on the GPS, play some music, change the | temperature, and when she is driving I become the | navigator/flight-engineer. Having those controls in the | wheel would be incredibly annoying for us. | genocidicbunny wrote: | In my Mazda, the climate controls are physical, but in | the center console, and easily accessible to both driver | and front passenger. The wheel-based controls are things | like skip forward/backward, bring up voice input, or end | call. That's also about the extent of things I consider | the driver should be focusing on. When I was younger, on | family trips, even climate control was something | relegated to the passenger; Even for the driver side. | | I consider putting in a destination on the GPS, or | setting up my music playlist to be 'park the car' types | of things if simply doing it via voice control doesn't | work. | karamanolev wrote: | Yet, it's not what people are doing. The UIs of cars and | other objects should take into account how they're going to | be used, not how they are designed to be used. It's been | proven again and again that you can only marginally educate | or tell people how to behave. It's better to make a system | that is safe 7/10 in real world usage, instead of one | designed for 9/10, but actually getting 5/10. | lttlrck wrote: | Both hands staying on the steering wheel is a _huge_ | plus. And the inputs are stepwise and therefore less | prone to error, so safer. | | And then there is Siri which makes all the things that | you might want to do while driving, and probably | shouldn't (touchscreen or not) far easier and safer. | | How is a touchscreen safer? | stonogo wrote: | The solution to "stupid people won't keep their eyes on | the road while driving" is not "force everyone else to | take their eyes off the road as well." | andrewla wrote: | Wow, that sounds intensely bad! | | I haven't actually driven a Mazda, I just heard that they | were getting rid of touchscreens and it honestly didn't occur | to me that they'd try to shoehorn full Android Auto or | CarPlay into that. I just assumed that they would have a | minimal interface and let your phone do the work, and then | have "next track" and "previous track" buttons and a volume | knob, plus climate control and stuff, and the screen would | just have various car information; tire pressure and fuel | efficiency and various camera systems for parking. | | It might still work for me (I'm definitely going to test | drive a Mazda when my current car needs replacing), but this | is me; I disable CarPlay because I can't stand it; I prefer | to just put my phone on a mount and use it directly; I just | need the car systems as a speaker for the phone. | izacus wrote: | I own a Mazda and using Android Auto with physical controls | works just fine, no idea what the OP is talking about. All | the main driving features are accessible by buttons and | don't need eyes off the road. | | It's a massive difference in compasion to some brands that | require you to use touchscreen to switch to next track or | adjust AC temp. | vel0city wrote: | Which cars have touchscreens and don't have steering | wheel media controls? | syzar wrote: | Volvo and Ford Edge use touchscreens to adjust AC and | there is no steering wheel control for it. | vel0city wrote: | Changing the AC, even with physical controls, is a | distraction from driving. I don't get why anyone drives | without it being on auto climate as you're inviting more | distractions. If its on auto climate why are you making | adjustments while you drive? | izacus wrote: | Renault Zoe was the last one I've drove with that | annoying issue (at least the model I had). | | There was also a BMW Series 1, that requred selecting a | media page in dashboard screen and then selecting a next | track button. (No support for Auto on that one tho.) | vel0city wrote: | Interesting. It seems like almost all cars sold in the US | these days have steering wheel media controls, even | cheaper base models. It feels like you'd have to go out | of your way to find one that doesn't have it. | 0x457 wrote: | > Android Auto and CarPlay interfaces were designed for | touchscreen control. Mazda forcing the use of a wheel, like a | joystick is a safety hazard. | | What? How is it a safety hazard? I'm far more distracted | trying to touch the button on display or scroll in my | Wrangler, than using a wheel in my Miata. Selection is | extremely predictable and always the same order, it's a basic | accessibility feature of android. | | I enjoy using the knob with android auto far more than touch | screen, specifically because I don't have to move eyes of the | road or have a hand in an uncomfortable position trying to | touch something on the screen. | | Plus, switching between navigation and media is a press of a | button that is always in the same space - next to the knob. | Compared to touchscreen... And on top of everything, it | remembers which navigation/media I'm using, so switching | between radio and android auto navigation is a single button | press. | | It's like one of the important features why my last two cars | were mazdas. | twblalock wrote: | > What good is tactile feedback when you have no idea what | you're adjusting without staring at the screen? | | This is what people don't understand about touchscreen vs | dial-based UIs. One is not safer than the other if they both | require you to take your eyes off the road and look at a | screen! | | If car makers want to have a button control a feature, then | they should simply make a button that controls that feature. | Cars worked that way for many years. Buttons, dials, or | trackpads that move a cursor or select items on a screen are | slower than touch-based UIs, require at least as much driver | attention, and are less ergonomic than just putting your | finger on the exact item you want. | vel0city wrote: | The idea with the touchscreen controls is that the driver | shouldn't really be using the touchscreen at all while | driving except as a quick reference to the map. | | You're not supposed to be using the screen to adjust your | media while driving, there's steering wheel and voice | controls. | | You're not supposed to be adjusting the climate controls | while moving, auto climate should just handle it. Why would | I _want_ to be distracted by needing to change the climate | controls? I shouldn 't have to adjust them while the | vehicle is in motion. | twblalock wrote: | I doubt that was actually the intention, and even if it | was, we all know that's not how people actually use their | cars. | vel0city wrote: | Yeah, they drive while holding their phones on | speakerphone while talking into it like they're about to | take a bite out of a sandwich. | | Other than volume and next track/station, just about any | other media control is going to have my hand off the | wheel for a bit and probably require me to look at what | its doing even if its all just a bunch of buttons and | knobs. Like what, change which folder I'm in? Change to a | different playlist? Choose a different app entirely? None | of that is going to be done by just feeling around the | dashboard. | | And as mentioned, I'd probably return any car that I have | to adjust the climate more than once a quarter. Every car | I've owned for over 20 years has been able to keep its | climate consistent and comfortable without the need for | me to make adjustments for months on end. Why would I | want to be distracted making minute adjustments to the | climate settings while I drive? Why would I _want_ to | have to change the mode or turn it to more heat or more | cool or turn the AC compressor on or off while I drive? | Shouldn 't it just be able to figure out if the car is | cold turn up the heat and if the car is hot turn on the | AC compressor? Wouldn't it know the optimal way to cool | itself? Shouldn't it be able to figure out the best fan | speed to keep the climate as programmed ahead of time? | | Honestly, why should I even have to tell my car to turn | on the heated seats? I don't need to on one of my cars, | it turns it on automatically when its cold outside. | treeman79 wrote: | I can operate basically anything by touch in the car other | than the touchscreen. | Swizec wrote: | > Buttons, dials, or trackpads that move a cursor or select | items on a screen are slower than touch-based UIs, require | at least as much driver attention, and are less ergonomic | than just putting your finger on the exact item you want | | Mercedes does this really well. I was surprised. | | You can use the screen as a touchscreen, or there's a dial | thingy on the armrest that lets you scroll around the UI by | flicking your fingers. Similar to keyboard navigation on | computers. | | The end result is a touchscreen you can use effectively | when stationary and an easy-to-use control for when you're | moving and need to deal with your arm moving relative to | the car. And the sequence of UI selections are intuitive | enough that after 20min you can do it almost without | looking. | | My understanding is they've been working on this combo for | 10+ years. Newer models (since ~2018) have a full on | touchpad instead of the wheel. | | https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-news/tech/mercedes-mbux- | in... | elzbardico wrote: | I refuse to believe an UX professional or even a programmer | ever thought this could be a good idea. It must have been | pushed down the throats of the designers and developers by an | edict from some point-haired MBA. | syzar wrote: | I recently got a Mazda CX-5. Previous car was a Ford Escape. | I much prefer Mazda's approach. The touchscreen on the Ford | was a pain to use after several years. I think the screen's | touch sensitivity degrades over time. I don't know. It was | especially bad in winter. I haven't owned the Mazda long | enough to know if the joystick will degrade much over time | but I find the interface easy to use and navigate. It does | sometimes take a while to acknowledge a click. That's | annoying but overall I really like Mazda's approach. | walrus01 wrote: | > Generally speaking the horrifying quality of Ford's | electronics have been enough to keep me away from even | considering purchasing one. | | well it certainly is reassuring to know that not much has | changed at all since my boomer-generation older relatives | warned me away from ever buying a north american made car, | instead recommending honda/toyota/mazda/nissan sedans, 30 years | ago. | | what is old is new again. | ubermonkey wrote: | >Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are okay-ish, but frankly I | find the experience of just having the phone on a mount and | using that as the display to be far superior in almost every | way. | | That's super confusing to me. How is that superior to the | larger presentation of (e.g.) CarPlay that has (a) bigger touch | targets and (b) an automatically filtered presentation of apps | relevant to driving? | | I find CarPlay to be so good that I will not consider an | automobile that lacks it. I've never used the Android | equivalent, but I just assume it's on par. | cheschire wrote: | I think GP finds the tactile buttons more worthwhile than the | larger screen, and the small phone screen is "good enough" | for all the rest. | codazoda wrote: | This happens in every car I own. Chevy. Kia. Ram. | | I agree the phone should do everything. The equivalent of an | old aux cord (maybe via BT) would be enough. | | My Kia does have CarPlay, which is very nice for maps and | audio, but that's all I really use. It still has all kinds of | issues. My wife plugs in her phone (cable) and it takes over, | then suddenly mine wins it back, she flicks some stuff on her | screen to get it back again. Pretty messy in all cars I've | used. | andrewla wrote: | I currently have a Subaru, which almost gets it right. It | does switch me over to radio, but if you set it to the Sirius | "unit id" channel it is at least silent while you fix it, and | really you press one button (the "media" button that is a | physical button) and everything works again. Bluetooth is | spotty, so I mostly use a USB cable. | | Ford Sync, on the other hand, once it decides that it is | trying to connect to bluetooth, will often completely lock up | the system for minutes while it tries unsuccessfully to make | things work, and then you have to navigate through their UI | to get back to a good state, which means that if it decides | to glitch while you're driving, you're just out of luck. If | you have a little bit of luck your phone will just play the | driving directions out of its internal speaker. | mbesto wrote: | > Chevy. Kia. Ram. | | I'm pretty sure every single one of these just outsource to | Aptiv (fka Delphi Automotive) for electronics. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptiv | lotsofpulp wrote: | I have had no issues with wired CarPlay. Do you have wireless | CarPlay? I have not heard of that being reliable yet. | | If both of you are wiring into CarPlay, I do not see why Kia | would allow two wired connections to CarPlay. | mh- wrote: | Wireless CarPlay hasn't been reliable in my experience | either, which is unfortunate. Even if it's not flaky (it | is), the audio quality of music being played sounds highly | compressed compared to plugging in. | andrewla wrote: | The issue is that the car tries to decide which phone to | have take over CarPlay. I actually have a cigarette lighter | USB adapter so at least a second person can charge without | confusing the poor car. | | I generally find CarPlay to be annoying -- it is too | limiting a version of what is offered on the phone itself. | Notably the last time I tried to use it, it did not have | Google Play Music support (now that product is dead, and I | suppose by now they probably do support Youtube Music), and | it refused to let me use maps in a "north-up" orientation, | which is just a non-starter for me. | lotsofpulp wrote: | If Apple Maps does not let you navigate in north up | orientation, then another navigation app should be able | to. It does not seem like that would be a CarPlay | specific restriction, but rather something the app makers | did not implement. | | And there are a lot more apps that work with CarPlay | nowadays. I think it just took a few years for all of | them to roll out. | andrewla wrote: | I use Google Maps even with non-CarPlay interaction | because Apple Maps does not do north-up. At the time, | Google Maps didn't do north-up in CarPlay mode. Maybe | it's time I give it another try. Last I tried it, I found | generally that things worked less good in CarPlay than | they did on the phone itself, and decided to mostly treat | the infotainment system as a nice set of speakers for my | phone. | bayindirh wrote: | Then, I invite you to drive a Renault Taliant which has no | screen and delegates everything to your phone. | | Plug it in and fix your phone to the supplied mount, open | nav. | | Your phone is a throttling, OLED dimming, overheating | fireball from all the processing it has to do with the summer | sun beaming onto it, broiling and killing it in the process. | | I don't recommend this. | | The car has a terrific iPod interface built into it though. | One of the best working ones. | Mountain_Skies wrote: | That model probably wouldn't be legal in the US where all | new vehicles are required to have a video screen for a | rearview camera. Since they're already required to have the | screen for that purpose, it ends up being used to eliminate | other controls. | rootusrootus wrote: | It doesn't have to be a touchscreen, nor part of the | infotainment. The inexpensive compliant solution is a | rearview mirror with embedded 2 or 3 inch LCD. | toast0 wrote: | I've got a 2013 Ford with the much derided Sync 2. Everything | pretty much works, it's just the UX is really slow, and the | colors aren't pretty. Also, inputs queue up which is weird with | a touch screen. It adds up to infotainment being hard to use | while driving, but the buttons pretty much work, and the radio | stays off if it was off before turning off the car (if you were | on Bluetooth before, and your phone isn't present when you | start up again, it will try for a while and then fail back to | radio, and if your bluetooth audio level is lower than radio, | that could be loud... but bluetooth audio levels is a cross car | issue) | | Compared to my 2017 Chrysler which can't really turn off the | radio, only mute it, which doesn't hold across start cycles, | and refused to work with my wife's phone for 6 months (probably | a Nokia Android firmware issue, because it stopped working with | a phone update and started working again with a phone update, | but it worked on the Ford the whole time), and the head unit | has crashed while in motion a handful of times, the Ford isn't | so bad. | | But everything is terrible, and I look forward to a future | where the phone does most of the work. Although, my (couple of | years ago) experience with Android Auto is I'd rather use | Android directly, and not let it know it's in a car. | lotsofpulp wrote: | Anything compared to a Chrysler is not so bad. | rmatt2000 wrote: | I used to own a Ford Fusion with an early version of Sync. The | car itself was great. The Sync software by Microsoft, however, | was not. | | One of the innumerable bugs was in the voice recognition | system. No matter what song I requested, about half the time it | played "Tiny Dancer" by Elton John. | | I was demonstrating this bug to a friend who asked "What | happens when you request Tiny Dancer?" Sure enough, it played | something else. | NobodyNada wrote: | I bought a Focus with Sync 1 last year, and it was | infuriating. The most infuriating part was that every time | the car starts it defaulted to aux in mode, and there's no | button on the panel to switch to Bluetooth -- if I wanted to | listen to music from my phone, it took about 8 or 9 button | presses to navigate through three levels of nested menus to | get to the "media source" option. Every time I got in the | car. | | I finally ripped the thing out and replaced it with a cheap | Chinese CarPlay head unit that I got on clearance because it | shipped with defective software (there was a firmware update | available to fix it). I could not be happier with it. | vmarsy wrote: | For me, Sync only worked well to make phone calls ("Call | Joe") | | And during a brief period, I also had a windows phone, where | you could say "Call Cortana". Cortana was registered as a | fake contact behind the scenes, and all it would do is | trigger the Cortana assistant through that phone call. You'd | then tell Cortana what you wanted, and it had much better | voice recognition and capabilities than Sync, so it did what | you wanted 99% of the time. It was pretty cool. | | Of course it was annoying and a waste of time as you had to | always make that call first, but I'm glad the engineers on | Cortana remembered that "all problems in computer science can | be solved by another level of indirection"! | bergenty wrote: | No, CarPlay is king and the best way to interact with it is a | touchscreen. | anderspitman wrote: | Honestly I've been pretty impressed with the software overall. | I bought a used 2012 F-150 last year. There was something weird | with the Bluetooth. I was able to update it to run the latest | version of Sync which resolved the issue (it was a bit annoying | to find/format a USB drive that worked). What makes this even | more impressive is the newer software is designed to run on a | completely different UI with a fancy screen, but they still | support my older system just fine. | bearcobra wrote: | I think Ford is on the right track of having a large touch | screen with an actual physical dial that just acts as a kind of | stylus. The ability for the screen to dynamically adapt to | different use cases is huge, but in an automotive context | having tactile feedback is also so important. If they could add | a couple more of the dials that could be used for climate | controls or radio stations and then some buttons that users | could set up as shortcuts more people would be happy. | Animats wrote: | Does this mean you have to have a Google account to drive a Ford | vehicle? That's no good. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-08-16 23:00 UTC)