Being prepared with technology (what I want from Infiniti)

[audtatious]

For day to day driving what tools do you use? What is your opinion on current avoidance-style technology and the opportunity to add tools of your choice to the existing in-car systems?

I drive quite a bit each year from a work perspective and life behind the wheel can be quite challenging. Years ago in-car entertainment technology was limited to radio, 8-Track, cassette, CD-based entertainment dependent on the year. Then came cell phones to either distract drivers or assist them in times of need. We now have smart phones with live-streaming social media to pull us away from being safe drivers. Technology keeps growing and with it comes opposition or more possibilities.

Infiniti has been known for loading up their vehicles with a whole lot of technological "bang for the buck". Navigation, live-traffic monitoring and radio via XM services, hands-free phone with phone book, DVD with surround sound, lane departure sensors, adaptive curise, and with the latest Infiniti vehicles you have in-car email, Facebook and Google search. Some of the technology is limited to voice-only if the car is not in park or simply disabled unless you are fully stopped as a way to limit distractions (and possible lawsuits I'm sure). With mixed reviews, as shown here: Rants from the Ricer: WTF Infiniti Marketing, Infiniti has released additional in-car controls which may foster more distraction as the vehicle itself can control its own lane and actively stop the vehicle without any input from the driver. The flip-side is that these controls can give a false sense of security which can result in further problems or accidents.

While I appreciate all the technology I personally want to see more melding of what's available today, from a software/application perspective, to allow drivers to be more informed and possibly more interactive. The more you know the better off you are to make decisions.

In my travels today I have available to me the following tools:
- Radar Detector
- Navigation with live traffic monitoring
- Phone smart (Waze application)

Sure, a radar detector is primarily about early warning of police radar and laser detection. That, in itself, gives the driver early warning of more than just a speed trap as it will also alert to emergency vehicles in the area besides just police. Some detectors, like the Escort 9500, have the additional capability of posting live notifications to other nearby 9500 detector owners. Navigation and live traffic monitoring can be quite a tool for avoiding heavy congestion on your route, even though I have found they may not be very up-to-date due to delayed reporting at times. Smart apps, like Waze (now owned by Google), allow drivers to post notifications of road construction, road debris, vehicles on the side of the road, poor weather, police, and other hazards. For those who choose to be informed I find Waze to be an amazing application.

WAZE:


I am hoping there will be an opportunity to pull some of these together for a better in-car experience. While I do not expect a radar detector to be integrated with a factory system I would love to see applications like Waze (which supports voice commands) used in conjunction with the factory navigation system, or as an alternative to the factory system, to give us the road information that is much more useful than the limited information we receive today. This can be as simple as allowing the user to select whether the application should run in the background or foreground, and on multi-screen systems, which screen to use as primary. Obviously we would need the capability of even installing such apps first.

Infiniti, what say you? You have added much technology which automates a vehicles reaction, how about allowing integration of tools for the driver as well? The more information we have the better the decisions we are making.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

Day to day driving, I use my radio, power windows, and sunroof.
Granted, I really don't have to deal with much traffic either.

[audtatious]

In your case and point you would not have all the latest technology anyway. In my G I don't either. The Q is in another category and seems to be the vehicle I'm driving between customer calls more often and interoperability would be awesome. As time moves on I'm hoping for having more configuration options than what is currently available. Unfortunately I'm not sure how far down the road we will get here in the US due to people in general not wanting to take responsibility for their own actions. The manufacturers probably feel they must limit what can be done for fear that little Suzy may die in a wreck and her parents will blame the car manufacturer instead of Suzy's choice to try and play Candy Crush saga on the car nav screen while driving.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

Suzy is a whore.

[audtatious]

That's besides the point and adds nothing valuable to this.

Unless you have pictures

[frapjap]

I concur. Suzy can jump off a bridge after her friend Jonas.

Anyway, there is a ton of whiz-bang stuff these days. Honestly- all I want is an aux input, cd player, radio, and a convertible. Navigation isn't necessary having my phone and all. (Yes, Waze is certainly outstanding, and I use it regularly!) I like a good sound system, but with the way the head units are designed these days, replacing them isn't what it used to be. That blind spot, auto brake crap can go and be left on the drawing board.
Honestly, the only "new" technology I want is to have a car that will drive itself in traffic, like that one Mercedes.

[audtatious]

I'm more looking at how technology can further assist people being prepared while on the road. You know, knowledge is key to decision making, thus, allowing more interaction (besides just Bluetooth (voice)) to the screen systems of current vehicles could be quite helpful. What the latest Q's (except those older models with a rebadge) offer is a first step but there can be so much more.

You bring up a good point about not needing factory navigation and I agree as you can do navigation from Google, Waze and many more. But you can't pipe that information to the cars screen unless you do a bypass of their safety lockout and use AUX mode. In the Q50, where we can install Facebook, Google search, email, etc. we should be able to load other driver-related apps. Of course, that probably opens up a whole can of worms for manufacturers.

[MinisterofDOOM]

In the Q50, where we can install Facebook, Google search, email, etc. we should be able to load other driver-related apps. Of course, that probably opens up a whole can of worms for manufacturers.

Herein lies the big problem.

Software developers don't want to have to develop a variant of their application for every in-car infotainment system under the sun. And, right now, each infotainment system is completely different from the next.
But, right, now when you buy a car, you sign up for that manufacturer's infotainment setup.
To be honest, that blows, and it feels like such an antiquated approach. What if I like Ford's system but want a Nissan (neither of these things is true, but take the example anyway)? I'm stuck.
On my home PC, I can install whatever OS and whatever software I want.
On my smartphone and tablet I can do the same.
Hell, I can even do that with PS3 and my router and a dozen other electronic devices in my house.

But my car? Nope. Stuck with the manufacturer's (universally abysmal) operating system, user experience, and app selection.

What we need are some strong competitive in-car operating systems that will offer robust, manufacturer-agnostic application support. I want to see Apple, Google, Microsoft, and more start a new "mobile" OS war, in the car. And more importantly, I want to see auto manufacturers build infotainment systems designed to support these various operating systems out of the box. If I can multiboot different versions of Android, Ubuntu Touch, FirefoxOS, sailfish, Tizen, and desktop Ubuntu all on my phone and tablet, we should be able to do the same (architecturally) very easily in cars. Just more business for the already-booming ARM SoC industry.

I don't want Cadillac or Lincoln or Jaguar or BMW's version of a good UX. They're auto manufacturers and understand software design about as well as a Ramen factory.

I want the manufacturer to provide me with the hardware and a choice of software. If Nissan wants to make a deal with Microsoft for Windows Car, that's fine, as long as I can wipe it and install what I want. I need more Microsoft in my life like I need a hole in my lung.

[audtatious]

But we are not limited to the Infiniti Infotainment system. In the Q50 it interfaces with Facebook and Google via USB-connection to the phone and Bluetooth (granted, for an icon it has to be an option in Infiniti inTouch app on the phone), thus, the phone is driving it more than the Infiniti system. iHeart is an option but not yet available. In the UK they have other apps available. In order for Waze to function they would just need to allow it to have access to the touch screen and allow voice through the system as a pass-through. FWIW, it can already do voice as a pass through via the Bluetooth, all that is needed is for it to be able to allow the video and touch elements to function on the nav screen. At that point you would have FAR more information available as a driver than the regular Nav systems

[Looneybomber]

While a car manufacturer could outsource it's carputer development to another company, much like they do with their audio (Alpine, Bose, B&O, HK, Dynaudio, etc...), I think an overly complicated carputer isn't a great idea. Neglecting legalities, I don't want to have to reach towards my dash to touch a screen in order to read FB, or anything else I am surfing while driving. I have my phone in my hand and will use it for all of my eyes-off-the-road distractions. A simple GUI to click and drag through (like Android) in order to display vital info like radio, AC/temp, tire pressure, engine/oil temp, etc... is sufficient. I don't want to pay for data on my car and phone.

[MinisterofDOOM]

But we are not limited to the Infiniti Infotainment system. In the Q50 it interfaces with Facebook and Google via USB-connection to the phone and Bluetooth (granted, for an icon it has to be an option in Infiniti inTouch app on the phone), thus, the phone is driving it more than the Infiniti system. iHeart is an option but not yet available. In the UK they have other apps available. In order for Waze to function they would just need to allow it to have access to the touch screen and allow voice through the system as a pass-through. FWIW, it can already do voice as a pass through via the Bluetooth, all that is needed is for it to be able to allow the video and touch elements to function on the nav screen. At that point you would have FAR more information available as a driver than the regular Nav systems

Ahh, I see. Rather than acting as a separate unit, the car's infotainment system could simply serve as an interface for what you've already got (smartphone or tablet). Shouldn't be too difficult. Android and iPhone both already support display mirroring (not sure about WinPhone as the mere thought of using it nauseates me). Android even supports non-native aspect ratios and resolutions, although resizing isn't exactly flawless in my experience. Mirroring touch inputs should be extremely simple. At that point, you're offloading processing, too, which means the onboard hardware wouldn't need to be very pricey, either. Shift the cost from the car to your smartphone (something most tech-option-seekers likely already have) and suddenly the exotic infotainment options become much more scalable. It would also mean offloading media storage, which is arguably a good thing--if you already have the music you want on your phone, there's certainly no need to duplicate it on in-car storage as well.

[Jesda]

I think it's weird to hear "the Q" as a reference to anything but a Q45 or Nissan/Infiniti flagship.

And I miss being able to say "I drive a Q"

[BusyBadger]

I use a radar detector, the stereo system, I run Waze on my phone for any drive longer than ten minutes and occasionally use the nav unit in the Z (it's DVD based so maps aren't always up to date). Now that I've ditched that long commute driving has become more a pleasure than a chore, I don't even use cruise control very often now.

Does the Homelink mirror count? I can't imagine not having it in the Z, mainly for the garage remote but the auto dimming feature is great given how low the Z is. It's the one thing I wish the Juke had but doesn't, it wasn't offered.

Suzy is a whore.

Maybe not a whore, but Calvin hopes she's more fun than she was when they were in grade school.