• themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Touch screens in cars are evidence that the auto industry is actively trying to increase auto accidents.

      • jcr@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        Français
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Industrial grade switches (i.e.: buttons) are expensive because of very high quality control requirements, and add a lot more parts that can fail to a car. It is the same thing that happened with mobile phones. Going with touchscreen reduce a lot the number of parts to check and parts that can fail, even if usability is very bad for the end-user.

      • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 days ago

        Is that true? I’m too scared to look up prices. Electronically, touchscreens are infinitely more complex, but I can believe economies of scale brought it down lower than buttons… I just don’t want to believe that.

        • Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          2 days ago

          I’ve seen comments from auto manufacturers outright stating this. I think they also overestimated how much consumers care about touchscreens.

          • Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Pretty much no button these days directly controls something, it’s routed through the BMS. Headlights may be one of the few that are switched without some type of computer in between, possibly power windows too?

            And they’re all on a PCB.

            • Ageroth@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 day ago

              Even so, each individual button needs to be connected to that PCB separately, and will only have the function of what it says on the button, or possibly a couple hidden functions through programming.
              Touch screens are essentially one connection for infinite buttons with different screens and menus.

        • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          Touchscreens can be made at massive scale and then repurposed in batches for everywhere. They’re always the same (roughly speaking). Buttons are individual components, you have to lay the whole thing out custom how you want it to be, you have to put all these fiddly little components together… just having a robot make a big square object along with 199,999 other ones is cheaper, even if technically the big square object is orders of magnitude more complex than the chunks of plastic and springs and buttons etc.

          • kossa@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            Deutsch
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 hours ago

            I think the assembling is the crucial part as you stated. I mean, buttons can also be manufactured in scale by a robot, but every button needs to be wired, the touchscreen only once.

          • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yup, that about matches my thought process when I made that comment. Economies of scale make the complexity irrelevant.