Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just my opinion, but I think that point was reached many years ago.
In the 1930s used cars used to be advertised with "R&H", which meant "radio and heater". Heaters are fine, but cars really don't need radios, and it has been decades since I've listened to radio or any other sound system while driving a car. I find radios (and other entertainment systems) to be very distracting while driving, and changing stations or tracks probably has caused many accidents. I once drove 30 miles down the wrong interstate, missing my exit while listening to NPR. I even hate riding in a car when the driver has the radio on.
Ever notice, in the TV ads for cars with talking GPS, they never show the woman's voice trying to out-shout heavy metal? Apparently, you need to have the radio turned off, in order to use "turn right at the next exit". I don't know, I've never even ridden in such a car, and I don't think I know anybody who has one.
.
1. I don't find terrestrial radio terribly distracting, but I rented a Kia Soul with Sirius XM and found the radio to be more interesting than the road, which is a bad thing. Loved it, but I don't think I'll ever have a car with satellite radio for that reason.
2. My car with Onstar muted the radio to give turn by turn directions (which weren't always accurate in Chicagoland). I only used the feature a couple of times and haven't used it in at least four years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MckinneyOwnr
This is one reason why I primarily drive sportscars, and try to buy ones that aren't loaded to the hilt with options. Leather interior, a/c, stereo, power windows/locks, and homelink are about the only options I really care to have in a car. I don't need a car that has bluetooth to have my phone ring through the car stereo, or to be able to talk through an interior microphone, I don't need a touch screen, and I don't need navigation. I don't even need power seats, because once you set it, you never touch it again. All that extra stuff is add more items to the list of things that can break and cost money to fix.
.
Power seats are nice. I like to adjust the seat height from time to time. Fancy things such as touch screens are too much for me, though. I don't even like the new dashboards in GMs and Fords with the built-in stereos. Are you going to have to tear apart the dashboard to get out a jammed CD? The Sonic seems really appealing in comparison- the CD player and fancy dash are optional. AM/FM comes standard with a separate, replaceable radio.
The short answer is when it becomes a distraction..The technology in the average cell phone is too advanced for most drivers to use now. (see accident reports) and they are portable to any car they want to try and drive. New technology should focus on making people safer and not providing them with additional things to do while driving.
So I was reading a review of a car--I don't have the link I think it was a Ford on CNet? The review made a lot about the industry leading touchscreen/technology inside the car. It got me thinking, at what point is a huge touch screen, and a bunch of apps in a car a negative?
Far from being a techno-phobe, I'm thinking of safety and actually the driving experience. Three specific concerns, and then one question I have:
1. Safety: If a touch screen is designed and placed in a way such that your eyes are off the road for a couple of seconds at a time, how is that different from dozing off? Some designs are off. For example, one of the unfortunate aspects of the VW touch screens (2010-2012 models--haven't seen 2013s) is that the GPS is below eye level--you have to glance away from the road. Some car models place the navigation screen higher, even on the dashboard so that you don't glance completely away from the windscreen.
2. Driving experience: Even from an enthusiast perspective, surely too much interior tech will take away from the experience of driving, no? If interacting with your car, touching and feeling knobs, shifting gears, etc adds to the driving experience, then a central touch screen might be a disadvantage.
3. Cost: I hope it doesn't overinflate the prices of cars. Computers cost money, but then computer prices come down also....
Now the question:
4. Future trends: Are cars going the way of fly-by-wire airbus planes? As "self-parking" or parking assist technology and lane warning systems come in it seems that way. Here I'm not necessarily criticizing those technologies, rather I'm wondering whether it will improve safety. Planes have redundancies so that systems can fail and it still works. With current costs, that may not be viable with cars. If a car is essentially a computer, if it's system crashes with its version of the blue-screen-of-death, hopefully there's a backup that kicks in immediately.
I think we have reached that point!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
