Summary of Key Points
This news article highlights the issue of focusing on superficial aspects rather than essential functionality in the process of making new energy vehicles more intelligent. Automakers, in pursuit of a sense of technology and cost advantages, have over-relied on touchscreens to replace physical buttons, resulting in inconvenience for users and increased safety risks (such as limited vehicle functions when driving abroad and distracting operations). With user complaints and regulatory intervention, the industry is beginning to reevaluate its approach, aiming to strike a balance among safety, ease of use, and a sense of technology.
Detailed Analysis
1. The Embarrassing Experience of Locking Out While Driving Abroad
The story at the beginning of the article serves as a stark reminder of the disconnect between the "ideal" design of smart cars and their practical reality. A car owner driving in Kazakhstan encountered a safety mechanism triggered by the overseas location, which required over 30 hours to resolve, limiting navigation, entertainment, and even access to the fuel tank and storage compartments, leaving only basic driving functions available. Worse still, unlocking the fuel tank required pressing the hazard lights for five seconds (something most owners were unaware of), and there was no emergency solution for unlocking the storage compartment—a task that could have been easily accomplished with a mechanical switch. This example shows that automakers often design products with only the "ideal" user experience in mind (e.g., normal use within the country) and overlook the needs of real-world scenarios (such as international travel or system failures).
2. The Disappearance of Physical Buttons: A Trend That Causes User Frustration
The elimination of physical buttons was initiated by Tesla with its minimalist design philosophy, which involved integrating all functions into a touchscreen, akin to the "iPhone moment" in the tech industry. However, users found this approach counterproductive:
- High Learning Curve: J.D. Power reported that touchscreens increased the learning difficulty for new drivers by 40%, and even experienced drivers were confused (for example, some couldn't find the air conditioning controls after driving for 20 years).
- Poor User Experience: 15% of users complained about delayed responses, and 22% found the operations cumbersome. Physical buttons were rated 31% more satisfactory than touchscreens.
- Safety Concerns: Using a touchscreen while driving requires looking down, which is more distracting than using physical buttons (as demonstrated by test data).
Despite these issues, automakers continue to use touchscreens driven by cost and marketing considerations.
3. Automakers' Preference for Touchscreens: Cost Savings at the Expense of User Experience
The decision to use touchscreens is largely based on financial benefits:
- Lower Material Costs: A single physical button costs around $2, while a full touchscreen system can save up to 87% in production costs. The cost of a touchscreen is less than $50, making it much cheaper than a traditional button system.
- Time-Saving in Development and Production: Manufacturing physical buttons requires molds (costing hundreds of thousands), whereas touchscreens eliminate this need. Tesla's assembly process is 40% faster due to the absence of wiring and mechanical components.
- Marketing Benefits: Large screens convey a sense of technology and luxury, and touchscreen-based OTA updates allow for easy feature updates, appealing to younger, tech-savvy consumers.
However, this cost-driven approach overlooks the diversity of user groups (e.g., older drivers) and the complexity of real-world situations, leading to various problems.
4. Rising Safety Concerns: Regulators and Automakers Start to Reconsider Their Approach
The safety risks associated with touchscreens are finally coming into focus:
- Test Data: Swedish media conducted tests showing that operating vehicle functions at 110 km/h increased the average distraction distance by 57 meters in 2026 compared to 2022, indicating more complex operations.
- Regulatory Changes: European regulations (Euro NCAP) require that critical functions like turn signals and wipers must have physical buttons starting from 2026; similar changes are being made in China, with 19 essential functions (such as hazard lights, horns, and windows) requiring physical controls.
- Automakers' Reflection: Volkswagen's design director admitted that they had forgotten the fundamental purpose of a car as a transportation tool. The current trend is to "selectively return" to traditional physical controls for critical safety functions and use touchscreens for less frequent, more complex tasks, supplemented by voice commands.
5. Design Should Serve People, Not Complicate Their Lives
The core message of the article is that intelligence should enhance user experience rather than complicate it. The idea is not to reject touchscreens altogether but to use them judiciously:
- Functional Separation: Critical and safety-related functions (e.g., air conditioning, emergency unlocking) should be accessible through physical buttons for reliability.
- Practical Emergency Solutions: Emergency features should be easy to use—e.g., the fuel tank unlock mechanism shouldn't be hidden or require complex button combinations; users should understand them with a quick glance at the manual.
- Returning to the Essence of Cars: A car is first and foremost a means of transportation, with safety and ease of use being fundamental priorities. Technology should enhance these aspects, not overshadow them.
In summary, good intelligent design should be seamless and readily available when needed—without making users pay a price for unnecessary complexity or technical gimmicks. This news serves as a reminder to automakers that the benefits of intelligence should not come at the cost of user experience and safety. Ultimately, a car design that provides peace of mind and convenience is what truly defines intelligence.