User interfaces, in this case the user interfaces inside of cars and trucks. (The linked post slams the user interface of the Chevy Colorado.) More specifically, when it comes to controlling various functions like the radio station tuning/volume, interior lights, exterior lights, the heat/AC/temp/fan speed/vent selection, and a whole host of other functions usually handled by knobs, switches/buttons, and sliders.
The move away from the traditional controls and towards using a touchscreen on the vehicle’s infotainment center has some serious downsides, the biggest being the driver is required to take their eyes off the road in order to use those controls.
As Glenn writes, “Touchscreens are cheaper than buttons and knobs, which is why they’re pushing them. But they’re inferior.”
There’s one comment to the post that lays it out succinctly:
The biggest problem with the interface is that everything uses the same control. By that, I mean that unlike 'traditional' controls in automobiles (even if they all go through some kind of on-board computer) is that there's no muscle memory involved with controlling various systems.It isn’t just in automobiles that I’ve seen user interfaces that were awful and not very easy to use.
With traditional controls - buttons, switches, and sliders - one quickly learns which button, switch, or slider does what. That in turn leads to a driver not needing to look at the controls in order to change anything from the the fan speed, temperature (heat/AC), the vent outputs (defrost, floor, side/center vents), headlights, internal lights, radio station/volume, and so on. All require different actions and the body quickly remembers how do these various functions without thinking about it. The driver doesn't have to look away from the road in order to do any of these things.
The touch screen interface destroys that because the same action will have different functions depending upon which screen is active. The driver has to look at the screen in order to perform routine functions. That means taking their eyes off the road. That is what is called "A Bad Thing" in the engineering biz.
While some may try to use the "Then why don't you use voice command?" argument, I have found that can be as distracting as having to look at the screen, particularly if you have to perform some function you do only now and then as compared to every day.
User interfaces are supposed to be designed to make things easier for the user, not the manufacturer or engineering staff.
Does anyone remember the debacle that was Windows 8?
The programmers decided that a user interface that looked just like the ones seen on smart phones and tablets was a great idea...and it might have been if laptops and desktops had touchscreen monitors. But back then only a few monitors had that capability. People were still using a mouse or touchpad to navigate and the tablet style user interface was a painful experience with those devices. This drove Microsoft to come out with Windows 8.1 which returned to a version of the Windows 7 interface. (By then the damage was done and most people stayed with Windows 7 rather than switch to Windows 8.)
I have seen other poorly designed user interfaces for things like test equipment which made it more difficult for service personnel to use the equipment for its intended purposes. The engineers who designed it may have had no problems navigating the interface, but the average users hated it.
With that it mind, GM needs to go back to the drawing board for the Chevy Colorado’s user interface and return to using actual knobs, switches, and buttons...before it gets someone killed.