> And still the rest of the car industry doesn't "get" good UX. Le sigh.
Imho, a giant 17" touchscreen that replaces most physical controls in a car is also not good UX for a car. Why do you need high-res satellite imagery of your route on a screen in the center of the car? Just look out the window!
I'll grant that most other manufacturers also do a poor job of a lot of the UX elements, but Tesla ain't the great saviour either.
It is, because a lot of car-makers intentionally make the phone physically inaccessible by being out-of-reach when plugged in for CarPlay/AndroidAuto (they don't want to be complicit in texting-while-driving deaths - would you?). Most societies agree it's okay to use a large touch-screen keyboard thats part of the dashboard because (at least it's meant to be) positioned such that your eyes can still see the road ahead to some degree, and big chunky virtual keys go a long way too.
...telling me to fumble around for my iPhone, then somehow unlock it, get to the right app, then precisely poke its tiiiiny keyboard keys and hope autocorrect doesn't get it wrong (and it will) just to enter a new navigation address when I'm trying to negotiate traffic is a bad idea.
…but that doesn’t mean my last car’s abysmal “Ford MyTouch” or “Ford Sync” or whatever they rebrand it’s as was ever fit-for-purpose. How can a UI that can’t render faster than ~5fps be considered acceptable by the world’s leading carmaker? Where is the pride in their work?
You speak as though this is something new. It isn't. It was the same story back with Apple's iPod's clickwheel-and-drilldown UX. Nothing was stopping Apple's competitors from innovating on their own and potentially making something superior (and I was particularly fond of the contemporaneous UI of MS's PocketPC 2000's Media Player[1]). But they didn't. Instead everyone: Creative, Dell[2], Rio/iRiver, everyone just kept on putting out unusable plastic flash players that took 30 minutes to sync 10 minutes of 32kbps mono MP3 over COM1 or bulky HDD players unusuable to everyone except those people with ponytails who run that strange new "Linux" operating system I've been hearing so much about.
And before that, it was probably Braun vs. Philips.
For noncoherent reasons that I can't string together into a readable paragraph (I wasted over 10 minutes trying to already) I'll just say I think it's inevitable that in any consumer industry there will eventually be only one company with a monopoly on good taste and good design. Also consider how companies will hire people who are already aligned with the company's values, and we know Apple hires people with an eye for design regardless of their role, but Apple's competitors never had an eye for design, so they neve hired people with an eye for design, so they're never able to compete with Apple on the design front. Upstart competitors might be formed with an objective to wrest-away Apple's monopoly on good design but (post-1997) how could any design-focused small-fry compete with Apple on design? They can't. They'd ever get bought-out before they become too big to become a threat (if Apple's feeling nice), or end-up as another also-ran Android vendor with a nice handset, but you're still stuck with Google, and without the leverage of Samsung.
I don't know where I'm going with this post now, so I'll just end it here.
[1] Rightmost screenshot: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/KMKZKDjJzWY/maxresdefault.jpg
Because it’s incredibly useful.
It means you can navigate dirt tracks. See over treeelines. Judge the quality of parking lots. Find out what side of the building the driveway or entrance is on. Etc.
