I think cars should not be dependent on a touch screen for ANY of it's functions (or really have one at all). They are more difficult to use than tactile buttons, distracting, and do not receive long term support from the OEM.

What do you do with a 10 year old car that runs but the touch screen nuked due to age, firmware bugs or mechanical damage? Ford isn't going to be selling replacement units 10 years later and I have yet to see an 'infotainment' system that has aftermarket replacement considerations.

[–] Indie@lemmy.fmhy.ml 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Totally agree with this one.

I drive an old 06 and I much prefer using the the physical buttons to adjust things like music, volume, air settings. Even prefer using it to back up and having to use my mirrors and look back.

My '18 vehicle is all touch screen, cameras,etc. While the a/c functions better and I don't feel like my fillings are going to fall out from all the rattles and bumps, I find there is a real disconnect. I am even asked by others why I lean over and look at the back window when reversing.

I work in tech and I don't trust tech.

[–] onlinely@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago

“If you think technology will solve your problems, you don't understand technology—and you don't understand your problems.” - Bruce Schneier

[–] MrFunnyMoustache@lemmy.one 6 points 1 year ago

One of the many reasons I am glad I don't own a car. Touchscreens are only useful for navigation stuff, everything else should be with physical buttons so you could operate it without looking away from the road for even a fraction of a second.

[–] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

Yep. 100% agree. My new-ish Toyota RAV4 strikes an acceptable balance with touch screen vs real buttons/knobs. I don't think anything critical is on the touch screen except maybe the equalizer. The touch screen isn't massive either, but big enough to have a useful backup camera display.