It's because they cheaped out and used (cheap) electromechanical switches for the buttons and electromechanical rotary encoders for the knobs.

If they used magnetic hall effect switches they'd never glitch (unless the microcontroller itself is glitching). Hall effect switches are forever.

(And no: Even cars in Arizona don't get hot enough to wreck rare earth magnets... They'll lose strength slightly above 80°C but not enough to matter since the car knows its internal temp and can compensate if they didn't get the better sensors that auto-compensate).

For reference, hall effect switches and encoders aren't really that much more expensive for something like a car where you're going to be using/making millions of them. It probably saves pennies per car to use the cheap switches.

They probably don't want to use the necessary processor to do it because it costs more so you end up with laggy interfaces instead.

I can't imagine that they're using a powerful enough processor, and their code is just so bad that its slow.

It's clearly doable, Tesla has a snappy smooth interface. It still struggles a bit on pre ryzen cars with the web browser or video players like Netflix, but the actual car interface for car things runs fine and has for a very long time now.

It's because car manufacturers are loath to change microcontrollers in their vehicles because they've got decades of processes, tooling, and debugging with the (Atmel) chips they've been using since forever. When they decide to make a new car they basically just look at the latest Atmega(whatever) "automotive" chip (using really old chip tech) and choose that.

Atmel has "automotive" chips for everything! From regular MCUs to beefy ones with boatloads of pins and (slow ass) LCD controllers. They've made it so that car manufacturers don't even have to think! The engineers probably get an automatic OK to use whatever Atmel "automotive" chip they want but anything else requires a lengthy and expensive certification process.

Some cars are using STM32 chips made for automotive but they're not as common as you'd think!

Basically, the car manufacturers are extremely risk-averse because of low margins and something like an ECU recall can totally ruin the profitability of a new car. They're also lazy and don't want to try new things! There, I said it 😁

He's talking points of failure when it comes to a person interacting with it. At least that's my take. Imagine you're reaching for a volume button instead of a volume slider on the screen. You're going to hit that mofo basically every single time. Whereas with the touch screen you've got to look and pay attention. Make sure your finger goes in exactly the same place etc etc.

It’s a combination of, car manufacturers want to put cheap parts in where possible to maximize profit, and these snappy tablets you refer to aren’t snappy for a decade or even live a decade. Car screens need to make it the life of the car, which is expected to be roughly 10 years with most brands, if it sucks the same year 1 as it does year 10 that’s a success. The car manufacturers are valuing reliability over performance

How do you do "mechanical failure" with hercons? I'm all attention. They may not be as pleasant to use, but beat touchscreens still.