Volkswagen will restore physical buttons to the dashboard in its latest compact car, part of a wider move away from touchscreens.

In a particularly retro touch, the new ID Polo will even have a volume dial.

For a decade or so, automakers rushed to replace knobs and switches with screens, Autoblog noted in October, but users largely disliked them: Controlling the air conditioning, for example, required delving through submenus while driving, which was both difficult and dangerous. Research found that using touchscreens took longer and distracted drivers.

Hyundai, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche, and VW have all announced plans to return to more tactile controls, and US and EU regulators announced last year that cars with touchscreen controls could get worse safety ratings.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 80 points 10 months ago (18 children)

Touchscreens in cars was a terrible development. The natural haptic feedback of physical buttons is a must, while operating a vehicle.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 10 months ago (17 children)

    Touchscreens are wonderful in a car, just not for basic functionality. You can pry my Android Auto out of my cold dead hands.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago

    Touchscreens are good for context-sensitive controls. They don't make sense for basic controls that should always be available.

    I'm fortunate that I have a good touchscreen for use with Android Auto + physical buttons for things like HVAC and volume.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 10 months ago (6 children)

    You can have Android Auto without a touchscreen. My newish Mazda has joystick like controls for the screen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    The Mazda rotary dial is awesome. It does 90% of what a touchscreen does, and voice control or a passenger can do the rest. If it can’t be done with three or four clicks of the wheel or Siri, then pull over safely and use the phone.

    My old car had an aftermarket touchscreen CarPlay headunit, and I much prefer the buttons and dials on the newer Mazda. Borrowing somebody else’s (usually newer) car with a touchscreen feels like a massive step backwards.

    Sadly it looks like they’re also falling for the touchscreen b.s. on the ‘26 year vehicles, big L for safety.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago

    Yeah there is a lot of fuss about the cx5 turning to touchscreen and people hating it (in literature, not sure on the experience side yet). I have a 2020 and like the setup it has for sure.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    Seems even more distracting than a touchscreen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    It's not a joystick per se, it's a tilting knob, kind of like a 3D mouse. Older Benz models had the same setup, it's great.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (6 children)

    Phone holders are wonderful in a car. Get rid of the built-in touch screens entirely.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago* (5 children)

    Phone integration with the car is handy. Bigger screen + integrated controls. I have volume controls on my steering wheel and a button to issue voice commands to Android Auto.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    A $200 tablet and $50 holder is much more capable than the built-in touch screen. The built in touch screen is adding more $2500 to the price of the vehicle.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (3 children)

    The built in touch screen is adding more $2500 to the price of the vehicle.

    Others will say that touch screens are replacing physical buttons to reduce cost. So which is it? Touch screens add big cost or touch screens reduce cost?

    /Not aimed at you, since you didn't assert conflicting info

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    cost != price.

    The costs involved with that touchscreen are in the tens of dollars, and much lower than the myriad physical hardware it replaces. The costs of producing the car are considerably lower. The price manufacturers charge for that vehicle are considerably higher.

    Try to replace a defective touchscreen: the charge for the proprietary replacement screen is more than a flagship phone, but provides fewer capabilities than a budget tablet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago

    I recently fixed a phantom/ghost problem in my GMC acadia by replacing the touch glass for about $100. It was easy peasy. Had I taken it to the dealership, I assume it would have been a $1000 repair as they would have replaced the whole head unit rather than just the warped glass.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago*

    I'm not going to speculate on the cost (or price) differential, but due to the requirement for backup cameras, screens have been required in cars for almost 10 years now (in the U.S. , no idea about other vehicle markets). However, these need not be touchscreens.

  • source
  • parent