matthaeus

Adding a little bit of context:

I've owned a Model X for six years now and while Tesla's touchscreen UI is probably still the best in the industry, it is so surprising how many simple fundamentals of interface design they are not getting right.

I'm a UI designer myself and had some fun making this prototype that shows how easy it would be for car makers to improve usability and safety of their interfaces by making better use of the screens in their vehicles.

This won't eliminate the other downsides of touch interfaces in cars, but if we're stuck with them anyway, they might as well be as good as they can be.

Since releasing the "demo" video of my VR desktop operating system prototype, I've been spending some time diving deep into some of the design decisions and technical challenges along the way. It's been great capturing this on video to make sure the thinking doesn't get lost over time. Maybe this will be an interesting look at the process of making up a new interface for some here.

Thanks! The way I think about hand tracking is that it has its applications, but has to be used very thoughtfully. The mouse is approachable and gives me access to my entire field of view just by moving my wrist a bit. Hand tracking can feel amazingly natural, but lifting my hand/arm and possibly reaching out is a lot more work which people won't realistically want to do too much over the course of a day. If moving windows closer/further is a big use-case (which it isn't in my concept), I'd rather find an easy way to to that with the mouse than forcing people to reach out.

Yeah pixels per degree in common VR headsets is probably another 3x or 4x off :( No big deal, they just have to become lighter AND better :D

Yeah totally agree that this has no chance until HMDs get a lot more comfortable to wear, and better especially in the resolution department.

This is not a "2D apps on virtual screens" concept though. Every app can be freely moved, meaning there are no limitations to how you set up your workspace(s).

Also, I agree that there are SOME apps that will greatly benefit from making use of immersive/3D/stereo. But the significant majority of apps that you use today are great in 2D and will remain really great in 2D.

Niiiice. How did you manage to get this to look this thin?!

Sweet!

Cool, I'm now enlightened... and depressed

I want that re-share feature in every messaging app!

1/5 Apparently I don't know anything about my friends.

Cool info graphic in the end though!

http://youmewe.it/result.html?M0=10&O1=10&M2=6&M3=9&M4=16&M5...

That's how I imagined it too. Single finger would be reserved for getting back to a more conservative input mode.

Try tapping in the very bottom right corner with one finger. There's an invisible button that shows the fake Driving Directions UI. Then tap on that with 5 fingers at once to make the hints appear. They are just static graphics too though.

Fair points. I'm most excited about this actually:

...good ideas here that could be used in other domains.

I'd love to see more touch UIs that serve as secondary input mechanism for something else. If I had a big color picker for Photoshop in my iPad I would already be ecstatic!

Do you have an iPad? Save a bookmark to your homescreen for this URL: http://matthaeuskrenn.com/new-car-ui/prototype/

Nice! I knew I couldn't fool anyone with my wannabe professional -dB label there.

Not the author, but the way I see it this is specifically an interface for adjusting things eyes-free when driving. In an actual implementation, there would be some sort of physical switch between the in-drive control (demoed here) and a high-density "at rest" operation for passengers or more specific tasks (e.g. configuring the GPS).

Yes!

Interesting ideas. Maybe this is just me, but my wrists suck at twisting.

The thing is though: What if in the future, every car primarily has touch interfaces? Touch screens certainly took over a lot of other product categories by storm. I'd rather be on the side of exploring out-there concepts now, and hopefully have some cool solutions in the future.

I like your audio equalizer analogy.

If you look closely in the beginning of the video, you'll see that I'm proposing for this to be a special mode that would only be invoked from time to time. So as you are suggesting: It's all about showing the right controls at the right time.

The beauty about touch screens as input mechanisms is that they can obviously show an infinite number of interfaces. I absolutely agree that there's a right time for the right interface. My proposal is just one possible way to use a touch screen for input.

I love that rant.

I think you got it right. My proposal was definitely not meant to be the end of the conversation. Much rather the beginning. I'm sure there are huge opportunities in exploring a more diverse set of input mechanisms (and their combination).

In this case, I'm simply trying to make a point that touch screens can be more control panels with buttons and sliders on them.

You're making a bunch of good points. All of them show that there's still a lot to try, learn and discover in this space.

And keep in mind: I was thinking of this as being an additional mode to whatever the more "standard" interface would be. You could always have your standard AC controls (on a tactile-feedback-less screen though) but this quick input mode could be invoked when you know what you're doing.

I originally posted this as a "Show HN". Does HN update titles automatically sometimes?

nice mobile version. Special kudos for good documentation, too

After all the rage about Quartz Composer being a better prototyping tool for designers, I wanted to make this quick proof of concept to show similar things are also possible using less proprietary technologies that have more relevance on the web.

What a shame that even Paul Graham seems to be having his issues with a well-considered use of the word "design".

Degrading "design" to mean nothing but "aesthetics" is a view of the past, that young, savvy companies know well to avoid by integrating design from the very beginning of product planning stages.

(Maybe I'm misinterpreting what PG means. Although why else would he feel the need to use words like "fashion" and "hairstyles from the past" as an analogy?)

I'm especially surprised he uses this example because it doesn't even serve his argument well: The design of a programming language is only marginally related to aesthetics. Why not use an analogy that compares to the more prevalent criteria of a good/bad programming language?

On top of that, he makes an array of mistakes in his car analogy, and his use of "good" and "bad" design.

>The Cadillac was carefully designed to appeal to the average driver. The 911 was designed for performance. Which one is better design?

This is a moot question, since in real markets, the answer to this question depends on who you ask. Of course, the Porsche looks better according to today's standards. It's also better engineered, has better aerodynamics, etc. etc. etc. But the Cadillac was more widely available, had more leg room, more space in the trunk. And it was probably less expensive. So yeah. Neutrally speaking, both of these cars are designed well according to certain criteria.

>It's easier to tell good design from bad when you're not looking at current fashions.

Considering that the 911 aesthetics have not dramatically changed since then, looking at the image of a 1973 model will automatically feel more current, modern and familiar to the viewer. And speaking of fashion: The Cadillac's aesthetics have specifically gone out of fashion ever since car styling has evolved in a more sculpted and organic direction. No matter what field, anything that's recently out of fashion will be perceived as especially unpleasant and outdated. So how is it fair to compare one product that features aesthetics that are still largely regarded as fashionable, and one that's very specifically regarded as "yesterday" and unfashionable?

>Good design is timeless

If this statement was true, the whole fashion industry would be producing only bad design every single season. Timelessness of design is also nothing a designer of a product has any long-term control over. A product might be timeless in its design (=aesthetics? feature set? what does PG actually mean?) at the moment of its conception. But if it unwillingly becomes part of a trend (even if just because other companies imitate it), it won't be regarded as absolutely timeless anymore. It will have become a witness of its time, and the trends of that period. The first iPod could have been regarded as a timeless design when it was launched. But today, it is an unmistakable part of Apple's white plastic period. It is not timeless anymore.

"Design" stands for the planning/execution of all aspects of a product together. That includes aesthetics, feature set, implementation technologies, price point, launch date, market segment and much more. If PG had looked beyond the rather narrow horizon of aesthetics, he could have actually created an analogy that worked for him. Even if it included cars.

that's awesome

Yes it grabs trending tweets from the Twitter Search API as content for the demo. If that fails for some reason, then nothing happens (obviously something that I'll need to fix next).

Yeah this is no good for Lion users (assuming that Lion hides ALL scrollbars automatically, right?)