All else equal, I’d prefer to have a car with fewer touchscreens than with more touchscreens. Really, if we’re talking about something modern, just a small display for Apple CarPlay will do. Anything more than that just gets annoying. For this publication, seven inches is the perfect size.
Despite that sentiment, touchscreens have been an ever-growing section of the modern automobile’s dashboard for years. It’s only recently that some automakers have begun to realize that not everyone wants a sea of colorful glass staring back at them. It seems Porsche hasn’t gotten the memo yet, going by the new Cayenne EV’s interior.
Porsche on Tuesday released images of the electric Cayenne’s cabin, giving prospective buyers a glimpse of what to expect when they hop in the driver’s seat. And oh boy, there are screens. Lots of screens.
The Cayenne Electric comes with two screens as standard. The first, and probably the one you’ll be staring at the most, is the curved instrument cluster, which measures 14.25 inches and shows data like speed, remaining charge, navigation, and driver assistance tech. There are also touch-capacitive buttons on either end for stuff like suspension and lighting adjustments.
Then there’s the Cayenne’s real party trick, the centrally located infotainment display. It’s an OLED unit that measures 12.9 inches and curves into the center console ledge. As much as I hate how much real estate this piece of glass takes up, I can’t help but love this design. It looks amazing. I wish more automakers were creative enough to come up with something like this.
The screen is versatile, too, at least according to Porsche. You’ll be able to configure widgets to display the functions you use most, like the homescreen of your phone. There are five different color schemes to choose from, in case you want your dashboard to match that five-figure leather interior you paid for. The bottom of the screen houses the controls for heated and ventilated seats, though thankfully, there are real, physical controls for adjusting the temperature, the fan speed, and the volume.
In addition to those two screens, two more screens can be optioned for the electric Cayenne. The first is a passenger-side display that measures 14.9 inches diagonally. The person sitting in the right seat can use it to control stuff like music and navigation. They can even stream video while the car is on the move, while hiding the screen from the driver. The second optional screen is a head-up display, which displays stuff like navigation arrows directly into the driver’s field of vision.
In all, that means Cayenne owners can option up to 42 inches of screen on their dashboards (not counting the head-up display). That’s bigger than the screen in my living room, which gets more ridiculous the more I think about it. Does any car need this much real estate for displaying information? I’d say no, but Stephan Durach, Senior Vice President for UI/UX Development at BMW, recently told BMW Blog people really want passenger-side screens:
“You know, there’s a huge demand, especially in really big cars,” Durach starts. “People are asking for that,” he continues, “people say, ‘I want to have a dedicated screen for consuming content.’ There is room. So, you can think about that.”
People do love consuming media, I guess. I’d personally just use my phone, though it seems there’s a big market for people who want something more integrated into the vehicle. And if there’s one thing American buyers love, it’s choice. So Porsche is simply capitalizing on that desire.
Top graphic image: Porsche
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
Apple Car Play? Surely you mean Android Auto.
“You know, there’s a huge demand, especially in really big cars,” Durach starts. “People are asking for that,”
I will never understand this. The passenger display should be banished from the options list on all cars. I assume if you don’t option it, you just get a large panel of gross piano black plastic there??
I want to smash all of these w/ a sledgehammer…it would be fun!
A million fucking screens…yeah, no thanks…does everyone have to be entertained 24 fucking 7? Open the windows and look at nature for once.
Passengers don’t need their own screen…they get fuck all. I loved on the ol’ 70’s Pontiac Grand Prix’s where half the dash was pointed to the driver…it’s like it was designed so the passenger didn’t fuck w/ shit. Get in, sit down, shut the fuck up, and let’s enjoy cruising while blasting some tunes! None of this bs nonsense nowadays
(I thought hardly anyone wanted passenger screens? It was mentioned on here previously in a news tidbit)
Imagine getting burn-in on that OLED screen
First, let me apologize to those who find screens objectionable in automobiles. I spent 8 years developing the technology to encapsulate OLED displays with a flexible, transparent barrier film. Following this, I spent 3 years at Samsung in Korea getting them on the correct path for manufacturing. The driving force for the technology was the mobile phone display. Scaling to larger displays was bound to happen.
Second, the L-shape of the display is not an efficient use of space in manufacturing. I would imagine that several displays are packed Tetris-like to try to use the maximum area of a rectangular sheet.
I don’t think it’s an L-shaped display.
The central curved screen is one display.
The passenger screen is a separate unit.
The glass IS L-shaped though.
That makes sense.
I don’t mind the center waterfall display. Sure, a few more physical buttons would be nice, but my gripe isn’t that bit.. it’s the need to cram in another display in front of the passenger that I will never understand.
Screens are never going away from new cars – there has to be some sort of display for the backup camera, and phone mirroring like Android Auto or CarPlay is nice to have for maps and music. Aside from that, I wouldn’t buy a new car without physical HVAC controls, a volume knob and a wiper stalk. I don’t want to take my eyes off of the road a dig through menus to turn the wipers or defrosters on or the music off.
I have a small display for navigation. It’s called *My Phone*, aka minicomputer that I carry around with me – and it’s not actually all that small. I do not see the need to have that built into the car. Though a built-in place to put it would be appreciated somewhat.
This is what a proper Porsche interior looks like:
https://autopolis.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/porsche-911-interior.jpg
No screens, no cupholders, no nonsense. Just a place to drive. This is just stupid and a distraction from what you should be doing behind the wheel – driving.
This dash is so ugly! Nothing elegant about it!
Samsung tried curved form with TVs and computer monitors and a lot of people were complaining about how they caught reflections from all around the room.
My computer monitor is gently curved, 1000R if I recall correctly, and it’s perfect because I sit right at the focal point. It never made sense for TVs, unless you were going to sit 3 to 5 times closer to the television than a normal viewer.
If they’re going so far as to make it into curves, why not embed it, then? It still sticks proud of the dash and with dust-collecting gaps around it, as if the fingerprints the screens collect aren’t bad enough.
The only way to deal with sun glare from the screen at all angles, not just one… a curved screen.
My only fear is always the same for any of these entire dash screens. What happens to them all in 10-12 years?
That probably won’t apply to the Porsche crowd as much, but what happens when support is gone, and these no longer work like they used to?
You scrap the car, of course.
A friend got rid of an otherwise perfectly fine Ford C-Max because the screen system was irreparbly broken by a botched firmware update attempt. Ford wanted thousands to fix it, and a DIY transplant failed. Though I am sure wherever it ended up after he traded it in ended up eating the cost of it.
To me this looks like more ways for the damn sun to be reflected into your eyes. The piano black and chrome are already bad enough.
“consuming content” is such an off-putting phrase.
Perhaps I’m being uncharacteristically sensitive, but as an author and maker (not a “content creator”), I find it foul and denigrating to both parties. Like many artists, I put actual thought and feeling into my work and it can take years to bring to a point where you feel it’s ready for the public. “Content creator” and “consuming content” appears to imply that any kind of creative output is there to be consumed like some Hometown Buffet slop being fed to mindless figurative hogs* who then excrete it into the mud they walk in while waiting for more. Not that there aren’t “content” and consumers that fit that bill, but the phrase doesn’t appear to separate out that specific kind of creator/consumer.
*Stating that it’s figurative because pigs left on their own are pretty clean creatures. I don’t think any are reading this or I’d have said something different, but if any pigs do happen to read this, I would love a response to have the opportunity to apologize and to find out that there are literate pigs.
I can’t wait for you to write an article in two years “what happened to porsche, and why they are going back to buttons”
Can “Apple CarPlay” control an iPod?
Asking for a friend.
I think i’d prefer to see a simple big wheel interface than this splatter of screen across the interior.
I think this designer missed an opportunity to also build screens into the headliner, footwells, A-pillars, arm rests, etc…
GM currently with their latest offers have good screen integration along real buttons for simple tasks. The design of the dashboard was planned from the beginning to have that real estate of screen, they are huge but not overwhelming.
Are they still going through with their plan to not have CarPlay/Android Auto?
For EVs correct, I dont usually miss it, only when the car internet connection stops working for some reason. (Some type of outage or bad service in the area)
I guess if car internet is down, mobile internet would be down too.
I may be somewhat alone in this, but I would prefer physical controls for things like the heated/ventilated seats and heated steering wheel over temp and fan controls. For cars with automatic climate control, just set it to a comfy temp and let it regulate blend and fan speed accordingly. I think I might interact with the temperature controls once a week, if that. But for things like the heated seats and wheel, when I want those on and off, I just want to poke a button, and I’ll probably want to do it much more frequently than I want to adjust the vents.
Well designed and integrated screens are good and I’m honestly tired of hearing about how they aren’t.
For me the problem is not the screens, it’s the lack of options, is there a new car you can buy without a screen?
I think there’s the Slate, some little car sold outside of NA that relies on your phone, and of course the GMC Savana
Aside from that, screens in cars have been a mainstream thing for well over 20 years, so I wouldn’t count on automakers taking them out and restoring everyone’s beloved slider climate controls and segmented LCD displays at scale. Asking why automakers don’t make cars without a screen anymore is like asking why they don’t make cars with carburetors anymore or why Kellog’s doesn’t make a Surströmming Pop-Tart. It’s just something that almost nobody wants.
I agreed with you until you mentioned carburetors, direct injection is better in every way, going back to carburetors is going backward.
A screen is an interface to many features, if these features are removed and reduced to bare minimum then the screen is not needed, and i don’t mind simple monochrome LCD screens, the current screens are for connected cars with apps, this i don’t like, removing a screen is not going backward.
And i don’t know about “almost nobody wants” when there isn’t a choice anyway.
It’s simply not feasible to do what modern cars do without a screen. It would take five switches, each with 4 positions, to configure the “individual” drive mode of my car alone, nevermind all of the other stuff the screen handles. Which brings me to my next point…
If these features are removed and reduced to the bare minimum then the car isn’t competitive. Nobody is dropping a monthly payment more than the average mortgage on a Cayenne and wanting the tech of a 1998 Dodge Dakota.
The whole “get rid of the screen” argument is just as tired and absurd as the rest of the typical internet car nerd chants. Something something XV10 Camry…
What are we arguing about here? i’m not saying that the only option i want for all people is removing the screen, i’m saying the car manufacture can provide this as an option for people who want it, go back to my first comment, i said “for me the problem is not the screens, it’s the lack of options”.
I don’t mind if people love and want screens, good for them, i want diversity in options, not only about screens but also for colors, body styles and car sizes.
This is a genuine question, I swear it is not intended to be shit-stirring: how you feel, in a broad philosophical sort of way, about all those drive modes and settings? The Z4 has a Sport button, which sharpens things some – throttle, a less forgiving clutch, better (real, it’s an 03 so speaker fakery had yet to be invented) go-fast noises. Most of the time I forget it’s there though, and I’m reasonably attentive to my car. I’d wager most people – not everyone and maybe not even you! – but most people forget them or don’t know how to use them.
For example, when I was helping with the Yugo a while back, an Ubereats driver in an *at least* $70k Jeep got stuck in a ditch with two wheels off the road, not understanding he could engage 4×4 to keep driving. How many people, as a percentage, really regularly cycle through Normal, Sport, Sport+, Comfort, Eco? Or Mud, Sand, Snow (trying to remember everything I saw in the Range Rover I aligned the other week)…
I will say that on the bike, I’m happy to have Rain mode, where it dulls the throttle response. I rode in the rain on a bike without any sort of… Anything, really. Current bike is 300cc bigger though at 900, and a sport bike in the rain is a great recipe for ending up a greasy spot on the road.
I use it and it makes a very noticeable difference. My wife who is more representative of an average driver has no idea how to change modes and couldn’t care less.
Why do cars need “drive modes” in the first place? Get the damned thing right in the first place, then don’t let the uninformed driver fiddle with it. Modern cars don’t need to do 1/10th of the unnecessary bullshit that they do. And most of it is a distraction from the actual task at hand, driving.
I absolutely would drop the monthly of a mortgage on a car with even LESS tech than a ’98 Dakota if I could. There is nothing I need to do in a car that I can’t do with two knobs, a row of buttons, a small LCD radio display and my cellphone that I usually have with me anyway (for those occasions where I don’t know where I am going). And in reality, I don’t need the phone either – I drove all over the country for fifteen years before GPS became a thing. The main reason I keep my phone on GoogleMaps when going from Florida to Maine and back is for cop warnings. I know where I am going.
Exactly this. Car companies used to have to be good at things before hacks could rely on software crutches and much of the time, they still can’t get it right as they often don’t allow individual changes to the various settings, only some canned pre-loaded set of changes to the various inputs (like, if you want sportier fake-feel steering, you can’t also have the softer damper settings and vice versa). It’s dishonest, lazy, and makes for an unsatisfying experience whatever the setting. With all this technology, so many cars still ride like ass and with no driving joy gained in the exchange. Others might be too distracted by ridiculous acceleration numbers to notice or never drove anything good to know the difference, but not me.
We have this thing called CAFE standards to meet. Mostly. Probably in the future. Again. Maybe.
But those drive modes allow us to have the full capability of the vehicle while still being able to meet EPA mandated MPGs. So be glad they are still available.
Signed- a guy who mashes the SPORT button every time he fires up the ignition.
Bullshit. They just ruin it and make you think you are going faster while mostly making it more annoying to drive. Particularly when “Sport” means a hyper-active throttle and a transmission that won’t shift properly. Which automatics rarely do anyway. I don’t need a “sport mode” for my manuals.
Actually not true.
Mine is a manual but I will grant you the autos do hold the shift for an annoyingly long time.
But the normal mode is a choked back and altered mode to meet EPA testing for MPG and emissions. In my case sport mode opens up the throttle response to reveal how well the car performs. The normal mode actually causes less smooth shifting because maintaining proper rpms is more difficult in the choke mode. In my Macan there is also some suspension setting changes in sport mode as well.
My previous car, a Volvo XC40, actually had the capability to create a custom driving mode where I could set throttle response to sport and transmission to normal and it said the suspension setting could be changed but I noticed no difference there. All able to be controlled within the evil, hated touchscreen.
There are many good implementations of these features if you look.
So in other words, your car is poorly engineered. Got it.
Even in my M235i, which was also a manual, the various “sport modes” were largely pointless, and it was never as good overall as my 328i that has no driver controls over anything – it was just faster because it had 100 more hp. The suspension was perfectly fine in “normal” mode – Sport made it pointlessly stiff while seeming to do absolutely nothing for the handling. I guess making the car bumpier and the controls heavier were supposed to make it seem “sportier” or something. In my other cars I have had with it, it was actively annoying – particularly my ’17 GTI which made the throttle ridiculous. And that includes the myriad rentals.
You’re not understanding. These modes will unlock more performance because the performance will have to be dialed back in a world of increasing regulation on emissions and fuel economy.
Your position is that the cars are not as good with these. I am saying you will lose all of the good performance you worship without these modes.
Cars have to be engineered to be less than they can be in the real world. Having an additional sport mode that opens up the responsiveness is a good thing. Stop being passive-aggressive.
And I am saying you are largely full of crap, because that is not at all how it works. Sport mode mainly, with very few exceptions, just increases the amount of throttle you get for a given amount of pedal travel, and on automatics, affects where the shift points are. You can get the same effect by moving your foot faster on the throttle, and by shifting manually. Or better yet, with an actual manual.
The one exception I have driven is my 500 Abarth, where in Sport mode the car made 160hp, and in Normal 130hp, because it actually adjusted the boost pressure. And it drove better in not Normal mode, as it was less peaky and laggy, so I rarely used it. Plus it made the throttle annoyingly twitchy, as usual.
I agree! I think the part that people don’t like (me included) is a lack of physical inputs for things you need:
Plus Capacitive buttons need to go. I know I’m missing something, but that’s a good start.
I’ll agree here and add that I like the ability to control more functions in my car.
I actually liked the BMW iDrive setup for this reason. I would not spend a lot of time using it while driving but the feature gave me the ability to move the heat around in my heated seats back in 2005. It was amazing! Who doesn’t like having that level of control?
I will also disagree with the author’s position that a small, 7″ screen is ideal. You need the icons to be large enough to hit reasonably when the car is bumping down the road and small icons are difficult to hit. UX is lacking in many vehicles and I think this is where many of us profess dislike for screens. Don’t make choices based on what you want customers to do and instead design around the best use case and screens can be excellent at maximizing the usefulness and enjoyment of a vehicle.
Not all functions should be buried down in the menus. But deeper control of the settings for so many functions unthought of 20 years ago is a good thing we should celebrate.
Yeah completely agree here.
The amount of information, control, and customization available with a well designed system is just so far ahead of what we had not very long ago. No way I’d ever go back.
You shouldn’t have to hit icons while driving at all, bumpy road or otherwise.
If you have to have a screen because you are putting a zillion adjustments in the car (to which I say don’t) then a knob controller is the way to go.
iDrive and it’s various imitators are so far superior to a touchscreen they are in a different universe. I even had a car that had BOTH, my Fiata, and I never, ever used the touchscreen because the knob was just so far superior. Your arm is braced on the armrest while you use it rather than flopping around in space. Nevermind the greasy fingerprints all over the screen. But the problem is – they cost more. So we are stuck with the stupid screens.
But better still would be NO screen at all, IMHO. The only thing I care about a screen for is navigation, and for that my phone works just fine all by itself. It’s larger than any of the standalone GPS’s that I had back in the day, and a whole lot smarter given the data connection to the Mothership for traffic and crowd-sourced warnings. I see zero need to mirror that to a screen in the car. My Mercedes has navigation built in, and I never, ever use it, because GoogleMaps is so much better. The only one that was close enough to where I used the car was my M235i. Mostly because it could do split-screen with navigation and the stereo controls usable at the same time. Which is also a problem with CarPlay and AA most of the time. I don’t want to exit navigation to use the radio or select a new folder in the MP3 player.
I have the smallest smart phone I could get so it can fit easily in any pocket, so I kind of need it on the screen when I use nav (primarily for traffic). If I had to rely on those janky-looking phone holders to keep the phone in view, I would forgo nav (I keep the phone in a felt-lined slot in the console like a cassette) and listen to AM radio for the traffic report. When not in use, I usually turn the display off, which will still play music and operates through the steering wheel controls. What I like about this car is that there’s really nothing I need to touch the screen to use once under way and the car has no settings to change except shutting off instability inducer, which has its own button. I hate fingerprints. Humans are disgusting.
My problem with both the screen mirroring systems is that them being reliable seems to be down to luck. Works great in some cars, not so great in others. AA worked fine in my GTI, CarPlay was a disaster. I have done it in myriad rental cars with extremely mixed results.
I never connect anything to a rental, but my car has an issue where it disconnects for about 10 seconds every once in a while with the frequency increasing to about once a day, which prompts me to reboot the HU, which resets the reboot annoyance clock. It’s hardwired and I don’t know the cause, but it’s definitely on the car end. I think there must be some kind of occasional handshake that usually takes place behind the scenes, but some kind of error builds up, causing a disco while it performs the task instead of it being invisible. There have been several HU updates, but they reportedly haven’t fixed this common issue, so I haven’t bothered with them.
That is exactly why I often can’t be bothered. And when it’s unreliable, it will inevitably disconnect at the worst possible time.
I did it in the GTI, but usually ended up just using my phone for NAV directly anyway, because having to get out and back in to AA use the car’s radio and music player were far more annoying than the benefit of the larger screen. And I don’t need a larger screen in the first place. I was perfectly happy navigating with my tiny TomTom One back in the day. That’s a 3.5″ screen.
Rentals are where it’s most useful, given I am often in completely unfamiliar places, and too many cars don’t have a good place to clip a phone, unlike my own cars where a vent clip works perfectly in all of them.
Ultimately, screen mirroring is just something I could not really care less about, but seems to be near and dear to many. If it’s there and it works correctly, great, I might use it. If it’s not there, whatever. It is HIGHLY unlikely I will ever buy another car new enough to have it, so it’s a pretty moot point for me. I did try the route of installing an Android head unit in the Volvo wagon I had to add modern conveniences like BT, but that thing was a buggy disaster despite being a not cheap highly rated one. I am so over touchscreen anything in a car.
Mine reconnects automatically as if nothing happened and I don’t have to do anything but get briefly annoyed, which is why I think it’s some kind of handshake. If it weren’t for mirroring, I’d have an old HU installed instead and run an aux cable just for music (as I used to do) and navigate the old fashioned way. There is no way I would use a clip-on anything. I have never had a Bluetooth device be anything but buggy. I rebuilt an old radio cabinet with a decent Yamaha bluetooth receiver and even that will make a noise like a scratched CD after playing over an hour or so. At least it stays connected.
My clip works perfectly. Just drove to Maine and back with it in my Mercedes. But there needs to be a place to clip it, of course.
BT actually worked perfectly in that Long Duck Dong headunit. It was the headunit and touchscreen itself that was buggy. I have actually never had any BT issues in much of anything, other than random rental cars being a pain to get paired due to idiotic UX designs. But I only use BT for phone calls as a general rule (did use it for some NPR listening in the depths of the south as the MB does BT audio too), and I try not to talk on the phone while driving as a rule. But work sometimes requires it on my migration trips, I probably spend four hours in meetings while driving to Maine and back to Florida.
Now that you mention it, I don’t think I’ve had issues with BT the few times I used it on calls, but those were rare instances, so it could have just been lucky.
My issue with phone clips is the aesthetics. It’s like having one of those Walmart cup holders that locked into the side window track a few decades ago. I bought it when I was driving from North Shore MA to Detroit for school in a car that had no cupholder, but I didn’t end up using it because of the appearance. I find stuff of that nature to be like a visual version of the sound of nails on a chalkboard. Back to the original subject, touchscreens that stick up also fall along those lines, if not quite as bad. Mine is integrated into the dash. I still don’t like it, but I don’t hate it and, as I mentioned, I can turn it off, which helps.
Not following you on aesthetics, at least for mine. When in use, all you see is the phone with just the little grabbers on each side. When not in use, it’s not in the vent, it’s in the glovebox.
This is the one I have, it’s great:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00LU5LWQK?th=1
Holds very securely in my BMWs, Mercedes, Rover and the vast majority of rental cars. Once in a while I hit one where it doesn’t work. Usually goofy round or deeply recessed vents.
In case the link doesn’t work, Kenu Airframe+, about $20 on Amazon. I have 4-5 of them between various cars and the one that lives in my laptop bag for rental cars. Looking at it, I see they now have the Airframe Pro that adds some features that look useful for another fiver, I will probably order one and give it a go.
The phone sticking up is bad enough on its own, then there are cables hanging like the umbilical cords of some wretched Dollar Store Bauhaus alien mammal that just gave birth unless you have wireless connectivity and want to watch the battery run down, plus I have an iphone SE because it’s the smallest phone you can get, so I might as well be looking at it from the wrong end of a telescope if I actually need to glance at the map directions. I don’t need one, anyway, I built a slot for the phone so I don’t have to see it, take space from anything else, or have it fly about the cabin and the whole thing shows up on the integrated dashboard display that came with the car. It’s just like using the phone display, but more legible and without the gross imagery.
<shrug> You do you, I guess. I refuse to be stuck dealing with cars I don’t like to get functionality I don’t need.
I don’t see how that applies here at all, but whatever.
To the authors point, a 7” touchscreen with carplay is all thats needed. Recently upgraded my Saab to a Kenwood unit and its nice to have modern functionality.
But damn if these manufacturers have any concept of a real-world use case. I can barely use it because it has a mirror finish. Bad enough when the top’s up but forget it when the top’s down.
Curious if anyone has any recommendations for an anti-glare film?
At least they are trying something new.
I don’t mind screens, but most are atrocious.
Cadillac has the best curved screen display in any vehicle in their Lyriq and Optiq. But of course the Autopian ain’t going to give GM any props.
? Here’s an autopian review of the lyriq and here are the props:
With the Lyriq, Cadillac had to prove it could build a premium two-row crossover that could compete with the roughly 400 other two-row premium or near-premium two-row crossovers. Not only is the Lyriq competitive, I legit prefer it to the BMW and Mercedes crossovers I’ve driven.
https://www.theautopian.com/the-cadillac-lyriq-is-an-ev-worthy-of-jamie-lee-curtis/
“Cadillac had to prove it could build a premium two-row crossover”
That take is ALREADY showing their bias! They would never write “BMW or M-B have to PROVE they can build a premium 2-row crossover” even though they haven’t built a quality product in years. Their interiors creak, they are highly unreliable, their prices are obnoxious, and repairs costs are obscene. But somehow Cadillac is the one that had to “prove” they can build a premium product?!
That’s been the standard in the industry for decades from the US and UK. You’d never know the Germans lost the war. Not the Japanese, though—it took them until a lot more recently to get a fraction of the respect for building a lot of cars that were much better at being cars than the overpriced junk from Germany. Hell, the Koreans make complete trash and seem to get more respect than the Japanese did for so long. I’d get it if it were biased for cars with actual character, but we’re largely talking about boring everyday appliances, like SUVs and sedans which, by being more expensive, more difficult, and less reliable, are worse at that job. As for the interesting cars, I can’t think of a single German car that is more interesting as a driver machine than a competitor from elsewhere. Even their highest end classic stuff that I like, for the price, there’s always something else (or multiple elses) I’d buy. If it weren’t for the bias in their favor, I’d feel little need to voice this, but when every new iteration of predictable, yawn-inducing Porsche Camry comes out with a pants-shittingly insane pricetag to glowing reviews, I can’t help but dissent. People make fun of Corvette owners and their 1-of-only-5-with-an-unchromed-ashtray-and-this-shade-of-red BS, but Porsche owners are exactly the same as they snap up every stupid artificially limited “special” edition as soon as it’s announced, yet they get a pass.
The biases in the industry are very real and I’ve long since decided I’m not going to stay quiet about it.
Love their new design, but GM is a hard pass for me. No Carplay/Android Auto == no dice. If they want to do creepy data mining on the poors (that’s also me, I want one used), they should at least allow you to pay your way out of their dystopian data farm. I am not the product, I am the customer!
What exactly are you doing with your phone while driving? Music? Maps? Messages? Literally ALL those things are doable but with the app running in the vehicle’s infotainment screen. Reviewers who don’t have an axe to grind against GM have actually reviewed their infotainment and have shown it is more than capable at doing anything drivers need.
Also if you think Google or Apple aren’t mining your data, oh boy, I’m afraid I have some bad news.
I don’t Google, their whole thing is that you are the product and they sell everything you do across the whole ecosystem, I just include the Android auto to avoid the replies. I don’t think Apple is mining and selling my data, since they don’t have an ad arm selling it, they have stood up for user privacy in the past, and they market that as a feature. GM on the other hand is specifically trying to sell it. Also, OnStar blech.
“I don’t think Apple is mining and selling my data”
LOL!!
Everyone talks about touchscreens being hard to use because you can’t find the buttons, which is right, but designers miss something crucial about touchscreens: they’re too far away.
When you use an iPad or tablet, it’s easy, because the tablet is close to you. When you put something like that at arm’s length, all of the sudden, it’s really hard to hit buttons.
Designers should come up with some kind of gooey screen; like a screen that can form physical buttons that either extend from the screen or depress into it.
I just got my first i-Drive equipped car (2022 X3) and I really like the way almost every function can be done with your right arm in the resting position using the jog-dial knob in the middle. It’s pretty intuitive and doesn’t require as much attention as the touchscreen.
Passenger-side screens actually make sense, but not as much sense as screens for rear passengers — which are sorely lacking except in specially-equipped vans and larger SUVs.
I think Genesis also got that right by having a control knob thing for the infotainment on the center console, in addition to the touchscreen. I really liked that on the G80 I test drove.
I like my Mazda 3 for the same reason. Not so good as a rental car, where people expect to hop in and be familiar with the controls.
I rented a CX-5 about three years ago and some of the functions were less than intuitive. My son and his wife bought one last year. They don’t complain about it, so maybe the menus have been reworked. My wife had an X-5 with iDrive and its menu and knob worked enough differently that the muscle memory I have from it was a hinderance mastering the Mazda’s.
That’s a problem across the board with modern cars. Every one of them is different. Sometimes wildly so (Tesla being a special sort of special in this regard). So if you are driving different cars all the time like I am for work, it can be infuriating trying to figure out how to do even fairly basic functions. I had a new Nissan Rogue as a rental earlier in the year (avoid if you can, they suck) and it was absolutely ridiculous how long it took me to figure out how to do somethings as simple as pairing my phone to the thing and change radio station. And I am a computer engineer for Dog’s sake who works with every sort of interface known to man. My mother would NEVER figure out how to use the thing.
I will give Hyundai credit for putting a fairly easy-to-use touchscreen system in the base Soul that even my 77yo mother could mostly figure out on her own. It still has a dose of stupid, but it’s not completely terrible. Of course, compared to a premium car it doesn’t actually do much.
I remember seeing, decades ago now, prototype screens that would “bump up” any areas of the screen that were meant to be buttons, to give screens better capacitive feel. I think the huge level of complexity outweighed the function though – can’t imagine the integration of onscreen shapes to the little mechanical bits behind the semi-flexible screen was worth the complexity.
Really far away, and the thing it is in is moving up and down and sideways all the time with your arm reaching across space to try to work the idiotic thing.
iDrive-style controllers are infinitely superior because your arm is supported on the armrest while your fingers work the knob. But of course, that costs more, and even in premium cars we can’t have that, now can we? And now add the even more idiotic idea of *gesture* controls. <facepalm> How about I just give the car the finger?
Before the comments immediately turn into “ALL SCREENS ARE BAD” just remember the hyperscreen in the EQS, one mega flat piece flanked by an acre of piano black. Porsche could have done that. This at least looks intentional, sculpted, functional, and premium in comparison.
Shit that looks and smells a little better is still shit.