Are drivers ready for high-tech onslaught?

Are drivers ready for high-tech onslaught?
Related Stories
Body of a car, brains of a PC
August 13, 2007
Toyota: Gas-saving valve in engines by 2010
June 15, 2007
Related Blogs
Japanese revved up for car software standard

July 30, 2007
Nissan brakes for you

August 7, 2007
Volvo C30 to get 52 mpg

August 20, 2007
Self-parking, auto-braking, always-connected cars will soon be the norm as James Bond-like high-tech gear trickles down from luxury models to budget rides in 2008.

On tap from BMW, Mercedes, GM, Lexus and others are a wide range of high-tech navigation systems, parking assistance features, touch-screen displays, Bluetooth communications and other developments, as human control of mundane--and not-so mundane--systems is being rapidly ceded to automation.

But without one's own personal Q to explain how each gadget works, how much new tech is too much for the average consumer to handle?

"A lot of it is beneficial...But it can be confusing and in the automobile, that's a safety threat," said Don Norman, professor at Northwestern University, author of The Design of Future Things and co-founder of the Nielsen Norman Group, a company that consults with major manufacturers on the design of everything from Web sites to car computers.

Norman and others say automakers have their work cut out for them in teaching drivers how to best use these new tools. And then there's the user interface: Forget about familiar personal computer-like displays. Many advanced systems being placed in cars require no-peek coordination.

The more difficult task might be convincing people that a computer can read a map, place phone calls, apply brakes, mind the blind spot, stay in the right lane and maintain a safe driving distance from the next car better than the average driver.

Car tech

It's a change that will affect the entire driving world.

"Lots of people, including myself, used to say people shouldn't adapt to tech, tech should adapt to people. But now I look at it and say, 'We are making tech to be used by everyone across the world. The stove is the same in all cultures despite the fact that the cooking is different," said Norman.

Regardless of consumer trepidation, the computerized car has arrived not only for behind-the-scenes mechanics, but for driver interaction as well. As one CNET News.com reader put it: "This'll certainly give new meanings to 'blue screen of death' and your computer 'crashing."

Perhaps the best indication that the car-as-computer has "arrived" is GM's CEO Rick Wagoner being added as a keynote speaker for January's 2008 International Consumer Electronics Show alongside technology leaders like Bill Gates, Intel's Paul Otelleni and Panasonic's Toshihiro Sakamoto.

In a Telematics Research Group review (PDF) of 2008 car models, 70 percent have voice-activated Bluetooth communication capability and 80 percent offer navigation systems as either options or standard equipment.

"Any safety tech based on sensors will also become very popular...They are relatively inexpensive for the OEM to implement since the components have come down way low in price. And they also have value for the customer," said Phil Magney, co-founder and principal analyst of Telematics Research Group.

It's amazing how much of this is designed by engineers who have no real understanding of the way average, everyday people behave.
--Don Norman,
design expert

Drivers can expect to see things like parking assistance, blind spot detection, lane departure warning systems and adaptive cruise control trickle down to non-luxury models very soon, said Magney.

Already, 60 percent of 2008 models offer a parking assistance feature with audible warnings, and about a third offer camera-based versions that include a live video feed to a dashboard screen to give drivers a better view of nearby objects.

Other features could be harder for drivers to master. Norman, in his book, relates a story about a driver who's forgotten that his car is in adaptive cruise control, which allows a car to self-regulate speed and maintain a safe distance from the next car. After sitting in traffic for some time, the driver exits from the highway. The car, sensing there is no longer traffic immediately in front of it, speeds up to highway speed on the curvy exit ramp forcing the driver to slam on his brakes.

"It's amazing how much of this is designed by engineers who have no real understanding of the way average, everyday people behave. If you talk to the people who deploy these cars, they say it's meant to assist, not be relied on (for preventing accidents). The drivers are not going to understand that distinction," said Norman.

Thomas Plucinsky, BMW product and technology communications manager, disagrees with Norman's assertion that it's the automakers' job to anticipate misuse of a feature like adaptive cruise control.

"Our new adaptive cruise control...(is) really meant as an aid on the highway. Our intention is not to drive the car for the driver. It remains the driver's responsibility to keep their eyes on the road and keep control of the car," he said.

BMW's opinion is significant as it is a leader in high-tech car innovation and will likely drive new features into the market. The Telematics Research Group named BMW the maker of "the most technologically advanced vehicle in the world" based on the company's 2008 5-series vehicles.

BMW also knows the pain of being on the bleeding edge of new technology. It's iDrive system, which was introduced for the 2002 BMW 7-series, works similarly to an iPod click wheel in that a mechanical knob is used to maneuver around a dashboard-mounted LCD screen to control things like air conditioning and heating, navigation systems, communications and other features.

More from News.com on this story's topics

Automotive

RSS feed

See more CNET content tagged:
Don Norman, telematics, dashboard, car, co-founder

17 comments (Page 1 of 2)
"We don't want cars to drive themselves"
by rwmarejka August 28, 2007 5:21 AM PDT
Is the sub-text here, "We don't want the legal liability of cars driving themselves"? If the car's system did most of the driving, including accident avoidance and then failed to perform properly, due to say a software bug, then who would be liable for the damages in any accident?
Reply to this comment
Bluetooth
by shirsc2 August 28, 2007 6:11 AM PDT
I use a Bluetooth aftermarket car kit in my car and it is extremely useful. I knew it was only a matter of time that Bluetooth would become standard in automobiles. Most of my friends don't even know what Bluetooth really is yet. I usually point them to this site: http://www.bluetomorrow.com
Reply to this comment View reply
I like that my car helps me drive
by Crunchy Doodle August 28, 2007 8:15 AM PDT
My 2004 Infiniti M45 has adaptive cruise control and braking assitance for imminent collisions. It uses front mounted lasar radar for both. I find it works fairly well and helps me drive my car more safely. The adaptive cruise control allows the car to apply 25% braking to slow more quickly than just zero throttle if it needs to. With the way some people drive here in Southern California, I have even experienced the proximity alarm going off when a car cut in close in front of me. I know if the car had control of this, it likely would have braked, but luckily, Nissan had the good sense to let me do the driving. These systems are helpful, and I can also see that in the hands of some of the ignorant savages I see driving around, are not for everybody. For them, a '74 Pinto is just right.
Reply to this comment
Other points.
by duggerdm August 28, 2007 8:52 AM PDT
I am a proponent of FLW's "form follows function." I'm not at all against appropriate new technology of any kind as long it solves more problems than it creates for the majority of its consumers. While the article implied it did not emphasize sufficiently - that current automated automotive driving technology is computer geek driven rather than auto consumer driven. Working backwards from consumer needs and desires has generally been a historic problem in the computer development industry (computer geeks see the consumer in their own image - rather than simple tool users) and now the same failed approach has infected the auto industry as digital technology becomes feasible for autos. The other driving factor pushing the computer take over of driving is that the computer market has already demonstrated that computer (software and hardware) consumers will accept a product life of 1-3 years. You can see the auto execs salivating over a car that's dead or digitally obsolete in 2-3 years - or a chain of income producing mandatory software updates. Just can't wait to see this mess unfold.
Reply to this comment
Adding toys would help the real problem!
by natebooh August 28, 2007 9:00 AM PDT
Automotive manufacturers need to concentrate on getting vehicle efficient, reliable and longevity so the family use their meger wages for raising the children. Way too much money is being wasted on these throw away vehicles. So far one has achieved this. Now they think adding bells and whistles gizt and glitter will is the answer. Up scale is because the profits are higher for the management team, nothing about a quality product. Marketing does fine jobs of selling promises and so so products. All this is doing forcing more and more people to keep driving junk. They keep re-inventing the automobile over and over,---keep the bean-counters out of engineering would help immensely.
Reply to this comment View reply
High-tech = high cost repair
by mail man dave August 28, 2007 10:15 AM PDT
I don't want high-tech features in my car because it eventually breaks. At that point I'm stuck with a high-cost repair or deal with a high-cost feature that no longer works. One situation drains the wallet, the other drains the attractiveness and emotional connection to the car. Both situations are highly frustrating. Give me analog or decades-proven technology! It works for a long, long time, is easy and inexpensive to fix/replace, and it just feels good when something keeps on working and working.
Reply to this comment
Costly electronic repairs
by FRE0 August 28, 2007 10:46 AM PDT
Recently I had an electrical problem with my 2004 Mazda 3; it made it impossible to turn off the headlights. It took several days for the required replacement part to arrive so, until it did, I had to carry a wrench to disconnect the battery every time I parked. When the part arrived, it took a technecian 4 hours to install it. Fortunately it was covered by warranty but, at probably about $60 per hour, the labor alone would have cost me about $240 had it not been covered by warranty. If the car had been made before 1970, it could probably have been fixed in less than 1/2 hour. As cars become more complicated, repair costs can be expected to increase dramatically. A repair that in the 1960s would have taken perhaps half an hour to fix could take a day or more, and the cost of parts required could be astronomical. Although I'm not opposed to new technology in principal, we have to be aware of the problems it causes. Repairs could become so costly that an electronic failure on a 5 year old car would be so expensive to fix that the car would be scrapped even if mechanically it was in good condition and would provide reliable transportation for another 10 years.
Reply to this comment
Just wait
by vintagemxr August 28, 2007 10:55 AM PDT
"If the car is in control, it will not break the traffic laws or...speed limits. And you will have an angry driver trying to say, 'But, I'm in a rush. I need to get there,'" he said. " That is exactly what is planned down the road "for the good of the masses". The Brits are working on it now, tying GPS into mapping databases and the vehicle's operating systems. It's not even a technological issue anymore, merely a political one and the control freaks that run governments are salivating at the thought of being able to control and monitor people's driving habits.
Reply to this comment
How about some usefull tech
by andysomo August 28, 2007 11:13 AM PDT
Like electronically controlled valve operation, imagine how much more power you could get without having a fixed cam profile. Or electronically controlled intake runners. With a full electronic valve cycle, you could also implement a variable Miller cycle engine, which pulls less cylinder volume under light load, and large amounts under heavy load. You could double power output, and cut fuel consumption by half. Stop wasting time and money developing useless gadgets, and work on what matters, the power train.
Reply to this comment
You have to wonder how reliable it will be.
by lingsun August 28, 2007 4:05 PM PDT
I've always thought that if we had computer controlled cars they'd do things like refuse to make certain turns at certain intersections for absolutely no reason that anybody could figure out.
Reply to this comment
1 | 2 | Next 10 Comments >>
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement
RSS Feeds
Add headlines from CNET News.com to your homepage or feedreader.
Google
Yahoo
MSN
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Today's Top Stories
Early player leaves as Facebook goes corporate
Video: Monday QuickCast, 1st edition
RIM makes Bold Blackberry debut
HelioVolt claims CIGS solar-efficiency mark
Virtual worlds for preschoolers? They're here
Most Popular Stories
Google to launch Friend Connect for the social Web
FBI probe nets counterfeit Chinese networking parts
Stolen Mac helps nab burglary suspects
RIM makes a Bold BlackBerry debut
A modest proposal to fix Dell's customer service
Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

Dow Jones Industrials (0.00%) 0.00 12,745.88
S&P 500 (0.00%) 0.00 1,388.28
NASDAQ (0.00%) 0.00 2,445.52
CNET TECH (0.00%) 0.00 1,724.28
  Symbol Lookup
Detroit auto show
Detroit auto show

Detroit auto show
advertisement
On TechRepublic: 10 ways users mess up their computers
Advanced
search
Advanced
search
Visit other CNET Networks sites: