Beware of high tech running amok

Beware of high tech running amok

Some features are nutty, unnecessary or maybe both

Frank Aukofer
Automotive News
February 25, 2008 - 12:01 am ET

COMMENTARY

Volvo has a high-tech feature called BLIS.

But it's anything but blissful. It's mostly annoying.

And it's unnecessary, just like many of the other high-tech, high-cost and
mostly useless features being foisted on gullible buyers as manufacturers
think up ways to sell vehicles with faddish technology for technology's
sake.

Among them:
-- Rain-sensing windshield wipers: They usually don't work, and besides,
what's wrong with setting the interval yourself?
-- Auto-dimming mirrors: You can't see anything but headlights at night.
-- Keyless push-button ignition systems: How about inserting a key and
twisting it?
-- Radar cruise control: It slows you so the guy next to you can jump in the
lane in front of you.
-- Air-conditioned and heated seats: They're not needed if you sit on
good-quality cloth instead of trendy leather.
-- Surround-view cameras: What's wrong with looking around?
-- Proximity warning systems: You can't tell whether it's picking up
something in back or near the front fender.

By now everyone has heard about the BMW iDrive, a hopelessly complicated
system to do simple things, and Comand, which got Mercedes-Benz into a lot
of quality trouble. Lexus has a self-parking system that needs about five
times as much parking space as the average driver uses.

Some of the stuff has marginal value, like rear cameras on SUVs that can
keep some rutabaga brain from backing over a child. And Lexus has a face
recognition system that sounds a warning and applies the brakes for the
idiot who is drunk or nods off. Infiniti has a lane departure system that
sounds a chime and gently applies the brakes to bring the car back in line.

There are some extremely worthwhile high-tech inventions, including
stability and traction control, antilock brakes and tire-pressure
monitoring. But some are off-the-charts silly, like BLIS and similar
systems.

This is BLIS?

BLIS stands for "blind spot information system." Cameras are mounted under
the outside mirrors; they pick up cars approaching on both sides from the
rear.

When a car shows up in a supposed blind spot, a light inside on one A-pillar
or the other illuminates to tell the driver something he should already
know.

It's not exclusive to Volvo. Mazda has one, and other manufacturers and
suppliers have or are working on similar devices.

They are costly and pointless. They don't always work as advertised, either,
often providing false warnings.

Virtually all automobiles and trucks these days have large outside mirrors
with broad ranges of adjustments. Anyone can adjust the outside mirrors so
that blind spots do not exist.

All you have to do is adjust the left outside mirror so its right side lines
up with the left side of the inside mirror. And adjust the right mirror so
its left side aligns with the right side of the inside mirror.

I am continually amazed at how many engineers, designers and even some
automotive journalists believe in blind spots. They either don't know or
refuse to learn how to adjust their outside mirrors properly. Or maybe
they've been brainwashed by somebody's marketing department.

In Europe, they've even institutionalized the fallacy by installing those
ridiculous split reduction mirrors, which are supposed to eliminate blind
spots but are mostly confusing and fortunately not legal in the United
States.

I think the blind-spot myth was propagated by generations of driver
education instructors who told students to adjust outside mirrors so they
could see the sides of the car - a "reference point."

The problem is that if you adjust them that way, you get the same picture in
all three mirrors - and blind spots.

Then what?

So, with Volvo's $695 BLIS, a light goes on when a car approaches. What are
you supposed to do then? Guess where it is? Glance over your shoulder? All
of that is distracting, and distractions are the No. 1 cause of accidents.

The Mazda system, called BSM, has a page and a half of small italic type in
the owner's manual with warnings about how the thing might not work, similar
to those prescription drug advertisements on TV that warn of possible
disablement or death if you use the product.

The best part is that it says in boldface type: "Do not rely completely on
the BSM system and be sure to look over your shoulder before changing
lanes."

Better yet, eliminate those expensive, complicated and unnecessary
technology-spawned systems. Reduce the price of the car and spend the money
on something useful, like a tush massager.

Ed White wrote:

> BLIS stands for "blind spot information system." Cameras are mounted under
> the outside mirrors; they pick up cars approaching on both sides from the
> rear.

[ ... ]

> Virtually all automobiles and trucks these days have large outside mirrors
> with broad ranges of adjustments. Anyone can adjust the outside mirrors so
> that blind spots do not exist.

I'm surprised that someone who doesn't post to this newsgroup actually
knows that. In any case, I wonder how expensive the following system
would be:

Using the position of the driver's seat, automatically adjust the
mirrors such that there are no blind spots. Perhaps it could
incorporate the height of the headrest as well to calculate vertical
adjustment. If the driver adjust them inward, automatically revert to
the correct adjustment.

It shouldn't take much to implement a system like that

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:59:45 -0500, "Ed White"
> wrote:

>
>And it's unnecessary, just like many of the other high-tech, high-cost and
>mostly useless features being foisted on gullible buyers as manufacturers
>think up ways to sell vehicles with faddish technology for technology's
>sake.
>
>Among them:
>-- Rain-sensing windshield wipers: They usually don't work, and besides,
>what's wrong with setting the interval yourself?
>-- Auto-dimming mirrors: You can't see anything but headlights at night.
>-- Keyless push-button ignition systems: How about inserting a key and
>twisting it?
>-- Radar cruise control: It slows you so the guy next to you can jump in the
>lane in front of you.
>-- Air-conditioned and heated seats: They're not needed if you sit on
>good-quality cloth instead of trendy leather.
>-- Surround-view cameras: What's wrong with looking around?
>-- Proximity warning systems: You can't tell whether it's picking up
>something in back or near the front fender.

<sarcasm>

Gee, no remote control for the radio? Oh, the humanity!!!

</sarcasm>

V ery
I rritating
A ddition
T o
O nline
L andtravel
O pinion
G roups
I ncluding
S ome
T trolling

In article >,
"Ed White" > wrote:

> Some features are nutty, unnecessary or maybe both

> -- Rain-sensing windshield wipers: They usually don't work, and besides,
> what's wrong with setting the interval yourself?

Why have at toilet when you can just c*** on the kitchen floor?

> -- Auto-dimming mirrors: You can't see anything but headlights at night.

If that is what happens when you drive at night, perhaps your eyes are
not up to the quality required to safely operate a motor vehicle.
Time to give up the drivers license. You can take a horse and buggy,
after all.

> -- Keyless push-button ignition systems: How about inserting a key and
> twisting it?

I challenge you to find one person in America that would give up
keyless door locks and trade in the clicker for a key. I bet you
cannot find anyone, at least no one who isn't taking lots of meds.

> -- Radar cruise control: It slows you so the guy next to you can jump in the
> lane in front of you.

Oh, so you are the jerk who rides on my tail so close that you can
smell it every time I fart. Quit making funny faces when I pass the
gas and back off a little. Or get radar cruise to do it for you.

> -- Air-conditioned and heated seats: They're not needed if you sit on
> good-quality cloth instead of trendy leather.

Apparently this guy has never been to Atlanta in the summer or
Minneapolis in the winter. Must be nice.

> -- Surround-view cameras: What's wrong with looking around?

So you have have never heard of someone running over their little
kid because they didn't see them? I think everyone would welcome
an extra set of eyes.

> -- Proximity warning systems: You can't tell whether it's picking up
> something in back or near the front fender.

I thought you said that you were looking around? Did you miss
something, didja?

Maybe this guy should change to writing business stories. I hear
that buggy whip factory stocks are hot right now.

-john-

--
================================================== ====================
John A. Weeks III * * * * * 612-720-2854 * * * * *
Newave Communications * * * * * * * * * * * * http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ====================

"Ed White" > wrote in message
...

Remember who owns Vulva now...What else can you expect??

In article >, John A. Weeks III wrote:
> "Ed White" > wrote:

>> -- Auto-dimming mirrors: You can't see anything but headlights at night.

> If that is what happens when you drive at night, perhaps your eyes are
> not up to the quality required to safely operate a motor vehicle.
> Time to give up the drivers license. You can take a horse and buggy,
> after all.

Huh? I don't use the 'night' setting on my rearview mirror for the same
reason, all the detail is gone. I have excellent night vision and the
loss of detail annoys me.


>> -- Keyless push-button ignition systems: How about inserting a key and
>> twisting it?

> I challenge you to find one person in America that would give up
> keyless door locks and trade in the clicker for a key. I bet you
> cannot find anyone, at least no one who isn't taking lots of meds.

I've never had keyless entry. I don't really have a desire for it either.

In article >,
(Brent P) wrote:

> >> -- Keyless push-button ignition systems: How about inserting a key and
> >> twisting it?
>
> > I challenge you to find one person in America that would give up
> > keyless door locks and trade in the clicker for a key. I bet you
> > cannot find anyone, at least no one who isn't taking lots of meds.
>
> I've never had keyless entry. I don't really have a desire for it either.

Replace the word "keyless" entry with "sex", and see how foolish
that logic sounds when you say it out loud. Just because you
haven't tried something doesn't mean that you will not enjoy it
once you have had it, and thus, you desire it again in the future.

-john-

--
================================================== ====================
John A. Weeks III * * * * * 612-720-2854 * * * * *
Newave Communications * * * * * * * * * * * * http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ====================

In article >,
John A. Weeks III > wrote:
>In article >,
> (Brent P) wrote:
>
>> >> -- Keyless push-button ignition systems: How about inserting a key and
>> >> twisting it?
>>
>> > I challenge you to find one person in America that would give up
>> > keyless door locks and trade in the clicker for a key. I bet you
>> > cannot find anyone, at least no one who isn't taking lots of meds.
>>
>> I've never had keyless entry. I don't really have a desire for it either.
>
>Replace the word "keyless" entry with "sex", and see how foolish
>that logic sounds when you say it out loud. Just because you
>haven't tried something doesn't mean that you will not enjoy it
>once you have had it, and thus, you desire it again in the future.

I have keyless entry. It's called "not locking my door". Never needs
batteries either.

--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

On Feb 25, 11:41 pm, "John A. Weeks III" > wrote:
> In article >,
> (Brent P) wrote:
>
> > >> -- Keyless push-button ignition systems: How about inserting a key and
> > >> twisting it?
>
> > > I challenge you to find one person in America that would give up
> > > keyless door locks and trade in the clicker for a key. I bet you
> > > cannot find anyone, at least no one who isn't taking lots of meds.
>
> > I've never had keyless entry. I don't really have a desire for it either.
>
> Replace the word "keyless" entry with "sex", and see how foolish
> that logic sounds when you say it out loud. Just because you
> haven't tried something doesn't mean that you will not enjoy it
> once you have had it, and thus, you desire it again in the future.

I've got a couple of those items. Keyless entry really isn't on *my*
must have list, but a few things I've been spoiled by and now miss
when my car doesn't have them...

1) central locks. I don't mind using a key, but it is nice when both
doors and the hatch unlock with only one action.
2) Inside trunk release. That way I'm not fumbling with my keys in an
unfamiliar parking lot, and God forbid I drop them and they roll under
the car.
3) Heated rear view mirrors. Sure, the rear window defroster is nice,
but that's only 1/3 of my rear vision. Gotta have the mirrors too.
Esp. if they're iced over and I'm scared to scrape them for fear of
busting the power adjuster.
4) Remote mirror adjusters. Almost too common to mention, but how
else do you adjust the pass. side mirror without a helper? PITA if
you share the car with someone much shorter or taller than you.
5) Heated leather seats. Leather because I'm a slob and will destroy
cloth; heated because, well, have you ever sat your butt on 15 degree
leather?
6) Automatic temperature control. I thought this one was really
wussified until I bought my 944; now I love it. I'm always
comfortable in the car. My entire interaction with the HVAC system is
selecting "defrost" or "not defrost" and "air conditioning" or "not
air conditioning." No setting it to "hot" when you get in the car,
then fiddling with it after the car warms up so you're not *too* hot,
etc...
7) Good headlights. Sadly this makes the list simply because most car
headlights SUCK. The 944 now wears E-codes and a relay harness; I am
truly spoiled now.
8) rear wiper/washer. I have owned a lot of hatchbacks and all have
had the rear wiper/washer EXCEPT the 944, and now I miss it... got
most of the parts scrounged to add the rear wiper but sadly Porsche
didn't have a rear washer option. Am thinking of trying to rig
something with VW parts if I keep the car long enough.

well, there's my list anyway...

nate

In article >, John A. Weeks III wrote:
> In article >,
> (Brent P) wrote:
>
>> >> -- Keyless push-button ignition systems: How about inserting a key and
>> >> twisting it?
>>
>> > I challenge you to find one person in America that would give up
>> > keyless door locks and trade in the clicker for a key. I bet you
>> > cannot find anyone, at least no one who isn't taking lots of meds.
>>
>> I've never had keyless entry. I don't really have a desire for it either.
>
> Replace the word "keyless" entry with "sex", and see how foolish
> that logic sounds when you say it out loud. Just because you
> haven't tried something doesn't mean that you will not enjoy it
> once you have had it, and thus, you desire it again in the future.

Why do I want more crap to carry around, another thing to break, another
thing that needs a battery... For what advantage? Not putting a key into
a lock? Then I'd never really trust the security of it. If it had a door
lock as a backup it couldn't be more secure, if it didn't when the
battery fails or the remote breaks one would be SOL.