I do not agree with your assessment that Tesla is writing off the concerns and needs of its current customers to attract customers for a car that hasn't been built yet.
That particular post is laughable to me. The imagery in the dashboard IC is enough to make you get rid of a Tesla? NEVER should have purchased one then.
Totally got that, sorry if you thought it was pointed at you. I was agreeably pointing with you at the other postUmm, I completely agree with you.
I was responding to a poster that was considering trading in his Model S for a BMW if the 7.0 firmware looked like what was posted in this thread. An incredible reaction if you ask me.
Although I understand the sentiment this is actually a pretty bad idea.Given everything that's been opined in this thread, I sincerely hope that Tesla simply offers us a "Classic" or "New" option to switch between the different interfaces. Hopefully (!) their code is modular enough to allow multiple interfaces on top of the real code that does the hard work.
We can debate about what constitutes "core" functionality, but an animated picture of the car you're driving clearly isn't on that list. Getting rid of time and temp for that is just silly.
I've apparently ruffled some feathers around here with my opinions. :smile: So be it, I was never someone known for holding back. So let me approach my feelings on this interface from a different perspective. (Again, all this with the caveat that we're talking about an unreleased, beta, not-final product that may not amount to anything when it comes to general release).
Is there something I'm missing or "not getting" about this new interface? If you're a person who likes it, or believes it's more advanced than what we have, or that it helps the driver more, then great. Please explain to me why you feel that way. What is it that you see in this interface that I'm not seeing? Tell me how this is better for the driver. Not for future potential owners, but for the driver sitting in front of it that has to interact with it.
Because I'm not seeing it. To drive, I need information. If I compare the information I get now from 6.2 with the information that I (apparently) can get from 7.0, it sure does seem like I'm missing a lot. Am I wrong? Does it matter? Help me out here.
A lot of this thread seems like a proxy war against Apple.
It might seem that way but at least for my posts that bring up Apple, it's not intended to be. I use Macs, iPads, iPhones, AppleTV, every day for work and home enjoyment.
The issues that Apple users have faced over the past 10 years are similar to what's now happening with Tesla, is my main point. So I find it a useful example to draw from, hoping Tesla learns from the Apple issues that have disappointed or made cynical many an Apple customer.
Anyway, I don't have a problem with criticism of the UI changes. I have a problem with the vehemence of some of them. I've said it before, if one thinks Tesla's software team and management are incompetent, then one shouldn't trust Tesla vehicles with their safety. That's different than saying they may not have design tastes that match one's sensibilities.
Heh. Then you of all people should understand that, until we are presented with the final incarnation of their research and work, this is all just gnashing of teeth and screaming at the wind.There have been comments in this thread questioning the credentials of so many owners' UI assessments and opinions. For the record, my academic background is cognitive science and I've been doing UI design, UX, info architecture, user experience, usability testing, etc., for many years including at several major consumer dot-coms where I managed teams of UI, front-end dev, and usability people, and worked closely with product managers etc.
This nails it on the head. I find the reaction on this thread to the updated UI to be laughable.
I trust the decisions that Tesla is making with respect to this UI. My understanding is that the car in the middle is an important way of giving feedback of the automobile beyond what is currently available. I'm very much looking forward to the UI and I think it's awesome.
Boom. Drop the mike and walk.... I don't have a problem with criticism of the UI changes. I have a problem with the vehemence of some of them. I've said it before, if one thinks Tesla's software team and management are incompetent, then one shouldn't trust Tesla vehicles with their safety.
I haven't enough bandwidth to read all the posts in this thread, so just one perspective:
Research upon research has incontrovertibly demonstrated* the analog clock face IS FAR MORE READILY understood by human brains - particularly when occupied by other tasks (like paying attention to the road) - than is a digital clock. I find that clock the most appealing part of the new rollout.
*on request. Or google it, any skeptics.
Well, I'm not a programmer but regardless..... Tesla is telling the Techs to delete the trip meters if they are over 2000 miles. Mine were reset to zero without my permission.
I'm going to have to put in a request for your sources on this one, because I tried Googling (and maybe I'm not picking the right keywords) and all I ce up with was two articles, one was a lifestyle type blog (with no sources) and the other was a "executive tips" blog series where the "source" was "some academic I heard on NPR in the 80s".
I guess my issue with this is that I have gotten so away from analog that it actually takes me longer to figure out the time. I would think that it would also depend on how your brain was wired (left brain / right brain) type notion as well. Anyway, if you have a source, I love reading up on these types of things!
+1, I'd like to get some decent material on this. I have an ADHD child (as an aside, he's non-hyperactive, which you'd think makes him ADD, but that term has been retired, so the classification is ADHD-PI or primarily inattentive). One of the tips we received from the doctor was to use an analog clock because it creates a visual representation of time. They sell timers that, instead of just being a countdown, show a pie chart that shrinks - this has been helpful at times. However, this is anecdotal and I'd love to read something peer-reviewed.
Also need to point out that right brain/left brain is just a myth.. plenty to Google on that. :wink:
AudubonB said:Research upon research has incontrovertibly demonstrated* the analog clock face IS FAR MORE READILY understood by human brains - particularly when occupied by other tasks (like paying attention to the road) - than is a digital clock. I find that clock the most appealing part of the new rollout.
HankLloydRight said:I sincerely hope that Tesla simply offers us a "Classic" or "New" option to switch between the different interfaces.
This is equivalent to the statement "I sincerely hope that Tesla doubles the workload of its software testers. Let's make sure that new releases come much more slowly and have more bugs. And while we're at it, let's make sure the developers have lots more work too, backporting new features to the old interface. That should slow things down even more."
HankLloydRight said:Hopefully (!) their code is modular enough to allow multiple interfaces on top of the real code that does the hard work
Do you still think it's a good idea?
Ok, this might be true, but it's apple/oranges here. First of all, the digital clock is very small and unobtrusive in the status area of the current firmware. If you were to replace that small digital clock with an analog clock, your research may apply, but frankly in a space that small, an analog clock might not be that clear when rendered.
And secondly, we're talking about a freaking HUGE clock taking up an entire side panel (only one of TWO available) displacing other critical information I would like to see while driving. I don't need a HUGE FREAKING BLAND ANALOG CLOCK in that space, I need ACTIONABLE data. Again, if we're talking about either a digital clock or analog clock taking up the entire space of that side panel, then yes, hands down analog is a better choice. But the issue is what is that displacing??
- - - Updated - - -
Nice job -- you have conveniently edited out my very next statement, which says exactly the opposite of all that:
If they did it right, it should be easy and possible to layer *ANY* interface on top of the stack, without any re-work or back-porting at all. I'm hoping that's actually the route they took. We shall see.
Yes, I do.