Comment Re:Uhoh (Score 1) 88
That's as simple as it gets. I'm no fan of the orange turd, but it's virtually impossible for him to be wrong on every issue.
This is essentially a high-stakes gamble. The payout is potentially millions, so they just try whatever. And I bet if it all turns against them and they're forced to pay legal costs etc. they'll just file for bancruptsy.
Huh? It's an unsecure and unmaintained open-source driver that's causing the issue. The OS is running perfectly fine.
Perfect illustration of the thinking problem here. You don't even get WHAT the problem is.
Why is a driver able to fuck up a system? The OS should be the watchdog that says "WTF are you doing there?", not the obedient slave executing whatever.
A great illustration is W^X - first found not in Windows, but in OpenBSD. Because Windows happily goes "whatever you say, master", while the guys at OpenBSD said "no actual use case of non-broken, non-malicious software should ever behave like that, so we'll block it".
since a non-MS open-source driver is actually the problem here.
If you are responsible for a sensitive location, and a five-year old kid from the neighbourhood one day just wanders in and take a look around out of curiosity, pressing a few buttons to see what happens - you would definitely not keep your job by claiming that the little kid is actually the problem here.
And you clowns don't think that your OS is a fragile pile of crap if it's that easy to fuck up?
Seriously? Do you even know what the job of an OS _is_ ?
A touchscreen doesn't negate that, either. Lack of physical controls does. They are not mutually exclusive. Oh, and my new vehicle also has a real dashboard with display in front of the driver, like a vehicle should have (unlike a Tesla). AND it ALSO has an HUD display with speed, speed limit, nav info, etc, as well. AND it has voice controls. So all options are on the table.
You are right. A screen that does not replace physical controls is a nice thing.
And I agree. Any vehicle that doesn't have a proper dashboard in front of me, where I need to look to the side to see important information, is a no-buy for me.
yes, it's a short list. But it's a start and a kind of "red line". I am hopeful they move that line to include other things that people use while driving all the time.
Are big screens nice? Sure, yes.
But if I have a choice between good physical controls and a big touch screen, I'll take the buttons and switches any day, thank you.
My 10 year old BMW has voice commands and a map that's always been more than enough for me. Sure, it's not as large, but while driving I don't want a big map - I want an indicator that tells me "next turn left in 500m" - and I have that, not on the main display but right in front of me on the dashboard. Newer models have it on a HUD.
Nothing in what you wrote makes a LARGE screen necessary.
They don't have to be better. They just have to be competing for the same ad money and users.
It's time YouTube gets some actual competition. Maybe it'll force them to revert some of the enshittification it's been going through. The crap is near unusable these days.
I don't know a single person who ever said that they want more or bigger touchscreens in their car.
Quite the opposite. I want physical controls and so do most people I've talked to. This is a car, not an iPad. Most of it I should be able to operate without taking my eyes off the road. And a touchscreen doesn't offer that.
In fact, Euro NCAP agrees. If you want a 5-star rating, you need physical controls.
The only people who want touchscreens are the car manufacturers, because it's cheaper and easier.
No problem is so formidable that you can't just walk away from it. -- C. Schulz