Replacing physical controls with touch buttons continues to be an incredibly dumb idea. Luckily several other manufactures who hopped on the trend are realizing it was a bad choice.
Is nobody gonna mention this horrible KITT steering wheel?!? That damn thing is dangerous.
Yeah round wheels are not a fuckin style choice. It’s so you can grab it anywhere in any situation. This steering wheel looks fuckin deadly
The only way a yoke would make sense is if it was drive by wire and could vary the ratio of the wheel dynamically depending on speed.
I’m still gobsmacked the Cybertruck is now a thing. Does nobody remember that we were ridiculing the design of that monstrosity 15 years ago?
Like it disappeared for a while, and now it’s suddenly in production with no changes, nearly two decades later? I feel like I’m from a Mandela universe.
Those are way more sensitive so there is no need to turn hand over hand. The downside is that that sensitivity can be really hard to handle at high speeds.
Not sure why you got down voted so much. Yeah those “wheels” look horrible. But I guess they are professional drivers. And all those buttons and knobs!!?
It’s great for Tesla, for one reason - modularity.
If your input/control has a physical button, that immediately needs independent wiring, assembly steps, A THOUGHT OUT PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PLAN, another BoM item to build the car/widget, and usually markings that limit its use for other functions (present and planned).
Tesla can bury controls and change interfaces as much as they like on the main touchscreen, or even add new features. It’s still trash for driver usability except when parked for all the obvious reasons, but hey they get to ‘push’ new features over cellular networks as they’re developed. Y’know, instead of selling a complete product in the first place.
Wiring/PCB header or connector/common data hub yes - but my point was that has to be thought out ahead, and cannot be modified afterwards in the same way touch screens can
BoM complexity and cross commonality is a challenge in manufacturing. It’s why we see all these ‘global platforms’ among automakers trying to build one unibody core subframe for all or most of their cars, adding different panels and roof assembly for an SUV or sedan respectively. Fewer parts to stock and build is a cost saving (for the manufacturer, don’t expect them to pass that saving along) - same with tactile controls.
Wiring/PCB header or connector/common data hub yes - but my point was that has to be thought out ahead, and cannot be modified afterwards in the same way touch screens can
BoM complexity and cross commonality is a challenge in manufacturing. It’s why we see all these ‘global platforms’ among automakers trying to build one unibody core subframe for all or most of their cars, adding different panels and roof assembly for an SUV or sedan respectively. Fewer parts to stock and build is a cost saving (for the manufacturer, don’t expect them to pass that saving along) - same with tactile controls.
It’s great for Tesla, for one reason - modularity.
Not really as far as the touch controls on the steering wheel goes. The icons are static and can’t be changed, so their functionality is kind of tied to the icon.
As for configuring additional controls for them, it’s exactly the same as if they were physical buttons, it’s all a wiring harness going to the computer either way, what that computer does with the input signal is not any less configurable for a physical button. The limiting factor is the static icon, not whether it’s touch/tactile.
In regards to selling incomplete products, this is unfortunately not even limited to Tesla. All car manufacturers release several updates and bugfixes for new cars, they just can’t send them OTA, they need to get them in the shop. My colleague’s VW ID4 has been in the shop for no less than 3 SW updates to fix various bugs and add basic features such as battery preheating for DC charging, it fucking shipped without that!
