The TouchScreen in cars debate

7eregrine

The man, the myth, the legend
:
Land of Cleve
:
2016.5 CX5
This should obviously go in the lounge, but we had talked about this before. And let's face it, no one goes to the Lounge.

(*Note to Anton: having separate Lounges for every model was a very bad idea).

Anyway, heard this on NPR today and thought I'd post it here to discuss. I like the point they make that it takes years for car companies to make big changes. It takes months with phones. The tech in today's cars is probably was designed and planned out years ago.

http://www.npr.org/2017/10/09/55670...ting-drivers-what-are-carmakers-doing-to-help
 
As I understand it, this is the primary reason for manufacturers moving to the knob control on the center console. I drove a BMW X3 loaner with that setup and that is what is in the 2016 and up CX-5's. However, I feel like the steering wheel buttons have been most driver's primary point of contact for the majority of functions.

I went with a 2014 for price and because I like a real handbrake. The ONLY thing that I do wish I could do without the touch screen and can't seem to do is change the audio mode. I go between stereo and radio often, but can't seem to find a button that does that without using the screen. If someone could point me to the obvious thing I'm missing, that would be awesome.

Further to the article's discussion, it seems to me that this is yet another reason for manufacturers to adapt carplay and android auto. Leave the tech to the people who are good at tech and stick to making really good cars.
 
As I understand it, this is the primary reason for manufacturers moving to the knob control on the center console. I drove a BMW X3 loaner with that setup and that is what is in the 2016 and up CX-5's. However, I feel like the steering wheel buttons have been most driver's primary point of contact for the majority of functions.

I went with a 2014 for price and because I like a real handbrake. The ONLY thing that I do wish I could do without the touch screen and can't seem to do is change the audio mode. I go between stereo and radio often, but can't seem to find a button that does that without using the screen. If someone could point me to the obvious thing I'm missing, that would be awesome.

Further to the article's discussion, it seems to me that this is yet another reason for manufacturers to adapt carplay and android auto. Leave the tech to the people who are good at tech and stick to making really good cars.

2014 here.

Also love having a real handbrake.

I have only switched between radio and other functions like bluetooth, USB, and Pandora via touchscreen. I have not seen a way to do it on the steering wheel.

I wish our 2014's had the same treatment as the European ones. Look at this. Has a commander knob AND a real handbrake! But...not quite sure where the cup holders are. Need to try to find other pics I guess.

car_photo_535273.jpg
 
I'm in the camp of, "your focus when driving should be driving and nothing else". Being able to drive is a privilege, but it is a privilege that can get people killed if you don't take it seriously. Before driving, people should already set their destination if using the phone or gps. If you are using a phone for music, then it should already be playing the correct station/playlist/etc prior to driving. As soon as you drive, everything else takes a back seat to the act of driving. I'm okay with people messing with their phones when they are stopped like on a traffic light, but once the car starts moving, no one should be messing with their phone or gps. You can always stop on the side of the road or in a parking lot to text or set a new destination.

I am in favor of Mazda actually disabling the touchscreen when the car is moving. Waze does something similar too, it doesn't allow you to search for new destinations while driving. There is now also a "Do not disturb while driving" feature for iOS, that is also helpful. The commander knob in Mazdas, which are based off the BMW setup is also good, as it minimizes the act of reaching out to touch stuff.

At the end of the day though, it comes down to whether the driver chooses to drive distraction free or not. The driver is the sole person responsible for making the decision of, should I be distracted while driving or not. The Mazda infotainment system can be hacked to allow use of the touchscreen while driving, the Waze restriction and "Do not disturb while driving" feature on iOS can be bypassed by pressing the "I'm a passenger button". To me, the problem really is the person behind the wheel. No amount of tech can stop the driver from being distracted, if he chooses to be distracted while driving. I don't even know the solution here. I don't think driving education/defensive driving classes will help.
 
I'm in the camp of, "your focus when driving should be driving and nothing else". Being able to drive is a privilege, but it is a privilege that can get people killed if you don't take it seriously. Before driving, people should already set their destination if using the phone or gps. If you are using a phone for music, then it should already be playing the correct station/playlist/etc prior to driving. As soon as you drive, everything else takes a back seat to the act of driving. I'm okay with people messing with their phones when they are stopped like on a traffic light, but once the car starts moving, no one should be messing with their phone or gps. You can always stop on the side of the road or in a parking lot to text or set a new destination.

Couldn't agree more. Plus it's a Mazda...enjoy the drive!

I am in favor of Mazda actually disabling the touchscreen when the car is moving. Waze does something similar too, it doesn't allow you to search for new destinations while driving. There is now also a "Do not disturb while driving" feature for iOS, that is also helpful. The commander knob in Mazdas, which are based off the BMW setup is also good, as it minimizes the act of reaching out to touch stuff.

Lost me there. I don't care for the "nannying" nature of disabling things.

At the end of the day though, it comes down to whether the driver chooses to drive distraction free or not. The driver is the sole person responsible for making the decision of, should I be distracted while driving or not. The Mazda infotainment system can be hacked to allow use of the touchscreen while driving, the Waze restriction and "Do not disturb while driving" feature on iOS can be bypassed by pressing the "I'm a passenger button". To me, the problem really is the person behind the wheel. No amount of tech can stop the driver from being distracted, if he chooses to be distracted while driving. I don't even know the solution here. I don't think driving education/defensive driving classes will help.

Exactly, so why bother with disabling it? I've had my passenger trying to pair their phone to do their Pandora station and guess what? Even though I wasn't doing it, it's disabled while driving! I don't care for that disabling "feature" at all.
 
Lost me there. I don't care for the "nannying" nature of disabling things.

Exactly, so why bother with disabling it? I've had my passenger trying to pair their phone to do their Pandora station and guess what? Even though I wasn't doing it, it's disabled while driving! I don't care for that disabling "feature" at all.
Disabling usage of the phone/app/infotainment is meant to discourage drivers from even trying to mess with it while they are driving. Some people will be put off by having to bypass it (if possible) and will decide not to mess with it. The result here is a win due to a less distracted driver. Still, most people won't care and will bypass it. The result is the same distracted driver as before.

From a system design perspective, the designer of the app/gps/infotainment system has no way to know that it is not the driver who is trying to mess with the system. It is safer to design it in a way that simply disables it while the car is being driven. It is an inconvenience for the passenger sure, but if that design stops a driver from being distracted while driving and ends up saving lives, that is a better end result than a grumpy passenger who cannot pair their phone to play their Pandora station.
 
Disabling usage of the phone/app/infotainment is meant to discourage drivers from even trying to mess with it while they are driving. Some people will be put off by having to bypass it (if possible) and will decide not to mess with it. The result here is a win due to a less distracted driver. Still, most people won't care and will bypass it. The result is the same distracted driver as before.

From a system design perspective, the designer of the app/gps/infotainment system has no way to know that it is not the driver who is trying to mess with the system. It is safer to design it in a way that simply disables it while the car is being driven. It is an inconvenience for the passenger sure, but if that design stops a driver from being distracted while driving and ends up saving lives, that is a better end result than a grumpy passenger who cannot pair their phone to play their Pandora station.

Who then distracts me by asking why it won't work? :p

With freedom comes risk. I do not care for the nannying nature of things. While I agree with all your statements above (I never drive using my phone or anything, I enjoy the experience of driving), I just am not on board with the principle of the matter. I don't see what the difference is between some of the functions disabled on my touchscreen when I am driving and others not disabled at all. They're all on the same touchscreen. GRanted some items are more distracting than others, but some choices make it completely arbitrary in my mind.
 
Last edited:
Who then distracts me by asking why it won't work? :p
In my experience, a passenger asking the driver why it won't work, is less of a distraction, than a driver trying to use Bluetooth to pair their phone to the system. Again this is looking at the scenario from the perspective that, it is possible that the driver is the one messing with the system.

With freedom comes risk. I do not care for the nannying nature of things. While I agree with all your statements above (I never drive using my phone or anything, I enjoy the experience of driving), I just am not on board with the principle of the matter. I don't see what the difference is between some of the functions disabled on my touchscreen when I am driving and others not disabled at all. They're all on the same touchscreen. GRanted some items are more distracting than others, but some choices make it completely arbitrary in my mind.
I agree that with freedom comes risks. This is a losing situation for the designer. They could design the system to be as safe as possible and please people in one camp, at the same time totally annoying people in the other camp and vice versa. They will then have to choose what to prioritize, safety or ease of use and this decision comes down to who their customer is. In this case, Mazda has chose to go with the "nannying" route.
 
I am in favor of Mazda actually disabling the touchscreen when the car is moving. Waze does something similar too, it doesn't allow you to search for new destinations while driving. There is now also a "Do not disturb while driving" feature for iOS, that is also helpful. The commander knob in Mazdas, which are based off the BMW setup is also good, as it minimizes the act of reaching out to touch stuff.

How is reaching for the commander knob any better than reaching for the touch screen? To me it's worse, because it takes longer to access something via Mazda's knob and menu system than it does using most of the touch screen systems on the market. And you still have to look at the screen while you're doing it.

IMO, Mazda's system is a misguided attempt to copy a "luxury" feature that originated with BMW, Audi, et al before modern touch screen interfaces were introduced, and has been obsolete for about 10 years now.
 
Last edited:
How is reaching for the commander knob any better than reaching for the touch screen? To me it's worse, because it takes longer to access something via Mazda's knob and menu system than it does using most of the touch screen systems on the market. And you still have to look at the screen while you're doing it.

IMO, Mazda's system is a misguided attempt to copy a "luxury" feature that originated with BMW, Audi, et al before modern touch screen interfaces were introduced, and has been obsolete for about 10 years now.
You are not "reaching" for the commander knob, it is right there below your right hand, right in the vicinity where you right hand would rest while cruising. This is arguably a better way to interface with a system, than leaning forward and reaching out your hand to touch a screen.

Also since they placed the screen right in your line of sight, you also do not have to take your eyes away from the road as much, compared to when you are trying to find a button on the touchscreen which is located lower in the dash.

Also the nature of the rotary commander knob allows you to scroll through menu items very easily, compared to having to manually scroll using the touch screen, which also means you have to look at it. The commander knob setup is so good that I often find myself trying to use it, when driving my Speed3 which doesn't have it. On our CX-5, I can go from the Music screen to displaying the Fuel Economy Monitor screen by using the commander knob without actually looking at the screen. If I need to return to the Music screen, I can press the "back/return" button without looking at the screen. Obviously, I need to take a peek at the screen to verify that I'm at the screen I wanted to go to, but that effort is miniscule since the screen is in my line of sight and a lot less distracting than using a conventional system with the screen lower in the dash.
 
Exactly. Or, as I was going to say "you obviously don't have a Commander Knob because if you did, you'd know". I jokingly call it life changing. I'm always reaching for one in my Volvo. I don't even use the volume button on the steering wheel...it's just so easy where it's at.
 
Last edited:
Exactly. Or, as u was going to say "you obviously don't have a Commander Knob because if you did, you'd know". I jokingly call it life changing. I'm always reaching for one in my Volvo. I don't even use the volume button on the steering wheel...it's just so easy where it's at.

Don't get me wrong, would love to have one. But would like my real handbrake retained too. ;)
 
How is reaching for the commander knob any better than reaching for the touch screen? To me it's worse, because it takes longer to access something via Mazda's knob and menu system than it does using most of the touch screen systems on the market. And you still have to look at the screen while you're doing it.

IMO, Mazda's system is a misguided attempt to copy a "luxury" feature that originated with BMW, Audi, et al before modern touch screen interfaces were introduced, and has been obsolete for about 10 years now.

There's a video out on Youtube from a Mazda event with Dave Coleman explaining why the infotainment system works as it does.

They've done videos of people driving and interacting with the screen and evidently it showed most people look away from the road for far too long. Since there are no buttons and nothing tactile on most screens you end up having to divert your attention from the road to work the screen. Mr. Coleman even admitted that when they filmed him working the screen he was spending too much time looking away from the road. It shocked him because he thought he knew better.

The command knob is tactile. You can hit the home button without looking and know the screen goes to the home screen and is on the far left choice. You can then move to the 2nd or third choice without having to look away from the road. Yes, you'll have to have enough experience with the car to do this but it'll happen quickly enough once you own the car. With the command knob you only have to look at the screen to confirm you're in the right place, rather than having to stare at the screen for long periods of time.eracting with the screen and evidently it showed most people look away from the road for far too long.

You also don't have to reach for the command knob. Your hand will be able to use it without you having to stretch or move your shoulder.

It's all part of keeping you aware of what's happening on the road. Is it a nanny thing? Probably. Will it save lives? Hopefully. At least it's well thought out and there are legit reasons for them doing it.

I'm older and remember when seeing cars weave and wobble down the road meant there was a drunk driver. Now it's someone playing with their infotainment system or their phone. There are a lot of them, too. Keep safe.
 
Losing the handbrake for the electric version is particularly nasty for those of us that like to drive a stick. Even on a hill you just start easing the clutch as you start letting the handbrake go.

Yes, there is hill assist but I've been on several test drives where the hill assist didn't do anything because the angle of the hill wasn't high enough. The car was going backwards and there was no handbrake to fix it.

Just wrong.
 
Losing the handbrake for the electric version is particularly nasty for those of us that like to drive a stick. Even on a hill you just start easing the clutch as you start letting the handbrake go.

Yes, there is hill assist but I've been on several test drives where the hill assist didn't do anything because the angle of the hill wasn't high enough. The car was going backwards and there was no handbrake to fix it.

Just wrong.

Yeesh.

I think the Miata still has a real handbrake.

I may not have a stick, but I agree that having a handbrake is just part of that driving experience.
 
I miss having a real handbrake... I think it's just that satisfying noise it makes when you pull it back. I am used to it and so far, hill assist has yet to fail me. I don't use it a lot so once in awhile I pause and have to remember "is it push down or pull up to activate it"? A question I never had to ask with a stick.
Looking for a smiley and found this: (boobs2) What the ?!?!? LOL
 
How is reaching for the commander knob any better than reaching for the touch screen? To me it's worse, because it takes longer to access something via Mazda's knob and menu system than it does using most of the touch screen systems on the market. And you still have to look at the screen while you're doing it.

IMO, Mazda's system is a misguided attempt to copy a "luxury" feature that originated with BMW, Audi, et al before modern touch screen interfaces were introduced, and has been obsolete for about 10 years now.

I tend to lean this way too. It works fine but I can do things much faster on Ford's Sync 3 touchscreen interface than I can with Mazda's system.
 
wow...a real e-brake, manual transmission, and commander knob. The best thing since they invented the 8-button video game controller.

Right?

No idea why our USA CX-5's didn't have the knobs? Must be good ol' MazdaUSA again...
 
Back