Consumers criticize Ford's new technologies

[suv_guy_19]

If my experience with the Focus is any indicative of anything, I'd say Ford has their ducks in a row.

 

I think that many of the reported problems simply come from bringing to the masses technology that they don't necessarily know how to use.

[BORG]

I think that many of the reported problems simply come from bringing to the masses technology that they don't necessarily know how to use.

 

Consumer technology is my life and I can tell you that MyFord Touch is not consumer friendly, it needs to be designed better. I enjoy it, but it's just bad UI that doesn't work as well as it needs to in a car. First rule in this business, never blame a user if they can't use your product...this is a car after-all.

Edited June 25, 2011 by BORG

[Pete]

I think that many of the reported problems simply come from bringing to the masses technology that they don't necessarily know how to use.

In part, yes. The interface is rather simple to use, not arguing that it isn't.

Now if there where no black screens, lockup's, slow response issues/ sync and other frequent problems people have, and are experiencing with this new system....., one could say that this is beyond some peoples ability to manage it. Like my 76 year old neighbor for example.

Nobody can really enjoy all it has to offer on a dependable basis until the system's quirks have been corrected . Some had the updates done with good results but are still mentioning small issues.

Once it has been perfected, nobody will have reason to complain.

Edited June 25, 2011 by Pete

[Pete]

the interface is too cluttered, there are too many things on the screen at the same time. Look at how other companies do it. Consumers don't want to deal with so much information at the same time.

i don't have a problem with the screen. I find it better then the small buttons on my 08 MKZ.

Now the tiny recessed button below the screen are another story. I don't even plan on using those.

We can do just about everything by voice too.....providing "she" responds to the commands, which she doesn't always do. Another software related quirk, i suspect.

[Edstock]

the interface is too cluttered, there are too many things on the screen at the same time. Look at how other companies do it. Consumers don't want to deal with so much information at the same time.

From the reviews, it seems that this is a serious troll problem.

[silvrsvt]

Consumer technology is my life and I can tell you that MyFord Touch is not consumer friendly, it needs to be designed better. I enjoy it, but it's just bad UI that doesn't work as well as it needs to in a car. First rule in this business, never blame a user if they can't use your product...this is a car after-all.

 

Sounds like you need to remove your Apple iOS training wheels....

[Noah Harbinger]

Sounds like you need to remove your Apple iOS training wheels....

 

I'll never understand Android drones who think that because something is harder, it must be better. Must be some form of masochism.

[aneekr]

same thing as manual transmission snobs, they are no better than computer geeks who insist to use emacs and vi instead of a modern text editor.

You made an excellent point in post #54, store249. With respect to that comment, the potshot against vi (and ostensibly Vim as well?) is uncalled for. :poke:

[tzach]

same thing as manual transmission snobs, they are no better than computer geeks who insist to use emacs and vi instead of a modern text editor.

Oh boy, here we go again. First of all by using the word snob you are implying that we think we are better because we prefer to drive a manual. That is not true. Second of all you are saying that driving a manual is harder thean an automatic, for some maybe, but not for anyone who is experienced. You anti manual guys are always starting this argument. You think manuals are old and modern autos are better. Well that all depends on your point of view. So in my opinion you are the snob, you think just because something is new and easier ( your opinion ) everyone should prefer it, well they don't so leave us alone to do what we enjoy.

[silvrsvt]

I'll never understand Android drones who think that because something is harder, it must be better. Must be some form of masochism.

 

I have an android based phone and had a iPhone 3G...and use an iPad 2. Not that much difference between them...not to mention I don't care for how locked down iOS devices are...

[RangerM]

lol, i don't see how anyone can argue that operating a manual is as easy as operating an automatic. For an automatic, just put it in Drive, if you want to speed up, use the throttle, if you want to slow down, brake. It's that simple. You can chop off your left foot and still operate the car. I don't think everyone should prefer it, of course, as noted, there are machoists who dont' want driving to be easy. They are, however, the minority, and car companies could save a lot of money NOT offering manuals, except a loud minority, which includes most car magazines, would whine. Why should car companies work extra hard to satisfy 5% of you, when they could spend that money improving the product for 95% of us instead?

Based on the relative rarity of manual trannies nowadays, I'd say the car companies don't spend that much on those of us who prefer them.

 

It isn't a question of "easy". It's a function of being more attached to the car, and the way it operates. For me it makes the driving experience more enjoyable. I do live in an area where stop-and-go traffic is not the norm, however.

 

To me, an automatic is for people who want a driving appliance, and not a driving experience. But that too is a matter of opinion.

[BORG]

Sounds like you need to remove your Apple iOS training wheels....

 

For the record, I don't think iOS is the pinnacle of UI design. There are other innovators like Windows Phone 7 and Web OS that are even more user friendly...just not as reliable or full-featured as iOS (and nobody beats Apple hardware design). Android is just bad UI design with a very inconsistent user experience from device to device, nothing is universal in that environment and you're left with paralysis of choice. If I had tons of time in my life to do things like root my phone and install custom ROMs and side-loads apps, then Android is a fun toy...but for me it's the very definition of a bad user experience and there is no incentive to own Android beyond having a cheaper device or a toy to tinker with. I need things to work fast and reliably so, I'm an adult now and my tolerance for wasting time with things that just don't work is growing very low (especially when Apple just never fails me like every other gadget I own).

Edited June 26, 2011 by BORG

[tzach]

lol, i don't see how anyone can argue that operating a manual is as easy as operating an automatic. For an automatic, just put it in Drive, if you want to speed up, use the throttle, if you want to slow down, brake. It's that simple. You can chop off your left foot and still operate the car. I don't think everyone should prefer it, of course, as noted, there are machoists who dont' want driving to be easy. They are, however, the minority, and car companies could save a lot of money NOT offering manuals, except a loud minority, which includes most car magazines, would whine. Why should car companies work extra hard to satisfy 5% of you, when they could spend that money improving the product for 95% of us instead?

I fail to understand why it gets some people so angry that some of us prefer to drive manuals. Obviously you do not drive a manual because you would understand that just because there is more involved with driving one does not make it more difficult. I do not find it harder just more enjoyable. You should not comment on things of which you have no first hand experience. I regularly drive both, my work truck and my wifes car are autos. My car is a stick and always will be. Try driving a stick for 6 months and see what you think ( I know unrealistic ) before making uninformed comments and putting other people down for choices they make.

[suv_guy_19]

For the record, I don't think iOS is the pinnacle of UI design. There are other innovators like Windows Phone 7 and Web OS that are even more user friendly

 

 

Well, you just lost all credibility with me. I've seen so many reviews that put iOS ahead of WP7 in terms of ease of use, and just works factor, it isn't even funny. Having used enough versions of Windows, I can tell you, they're probably right.

[2005Explorer]

my iphone battery can go a week without charging

 

That is the biggest line of BS I ever heard. It might go a week if you don't use it and it remains in stand-by the entire time. With normal use of applications, games, browsing and phone calls no smart phone will make it a week. Never!

 

I have plenty of Apple stuff including an iMac Quad Core, iPad 2, and several iPods. I also have a Motorola Droid 2. Apple makes great products, but they also have their quirks like the rest.

Edited June 26, 2011 by 2005Explorer

[BORG]

Well, you just lost all credibility with me. I've seen so many reviews that put iOS ahead of WP7 in terms of ease of use, and just works factor, it isn't even funny. Having used enough versions of Windows, I can tell you, they're probably right.

 

 

Windows Phone 7 isn't very flexible, it doesn't scale as well as iOS, but it's an instantly usable experience and puts allot of information in a well organized fashion on the home screen, no other mobile OS has done it that well IMO, it minimizes the 'app' vectoring common to every other platform. I would not recommend WP7 of course, I'm not saying it's better than iOS, but there is allot to be said about that UI. The only mobile OS I can recommend to everybody is iOS, Android is not a polished consumer product by a long shot, but it's a fun platform to customize for those who want to spend time doing so, but for me it doesn't add enough value to overcome it's usability problems. Still, they are all great platforms, I know some brilliant people working over at Google on Android and they are all highly motivated and inspired by their work.

Edited June 26, 2011 by BORG

[timmm55]

if they are so rare, and people like you are so rare, why should car companies spend money designing cars with manual transmissions, test them, certify them with the EPA, and other costly homologation that comes with selling production cars in the market?

 

imo they should just get rid of them!!! a powershift + slushbox transmission choice would appeal to way more customers than a manual + powershift!!!

 

OK, now it's official, you are a TROLL

 

 

 

.............and an idiot, just provoking people, Let's see, what car company is exclusively automatics? Cadillac nope the CTS, Lincoln, well, there was a V6/manual LS a few years ago, not Acura, not Infiniti, not Mercedes, not even Lexus. And these are LUXURY car brands! There are still some cars you can't get with an automatic: the BOSS 302 and Shelby GT500 Mustangs come to mind.

 

As Acura says:

For those who consider no sport sedan complete without a clutch pedal, the TL SH-AWD offers a 6-speed close-ratio manual transmission. The combination of a manual shift and Acura’s Super Handling All-Wheel Drive™ (SH-AWD®) makes the TL SH-AWD a true driving enthusiast’s delight.

 

The shifter features even shorter throws than the TSX’s acclaimed linkage for quick, confident shifting.

The clutch has low-effort movement to reduce leg fatigue and short pedal movement for faster operation.

The hill start assist feature eases manual shift starts on inclines. Sensing an uphill grade, the system holds brake pressure momentarily to avoid rolling backwards as your foot moves from the brake pedal to the throttle.

 

We're not snobs, but we are not stupid either. I like both for different reasons. Neither is better....and adding manumatics or paddle shifters to automatics doesn't do it for me.

[Ron W.]

There is no business case behind this.

 

And yet the companies building them still build them. Do you really think they would continue to build and sell something that cost them money with each transaction ?

[tzach]

lol i'm not angry at you, i just dont' think automakers should be wasting money satisfying your preferences. There is no business case behind this.

So your saying that every car company that offers a manual transmission, basically all of them, are wasting money just to keep a small minority happy? OK whatever you say. It is not even worth debating this with you, because no amount of logic, good reason or number of people will change your mind.

[mettech]

if they are so rare, and people like you are so rare, why should car companies spend money designing cars with manual transmissions, test them, certify them with the EPA, and other costly homologation that comes with selling production cars in the market?

 

imo they should just get rid of them!!! a powershift + slushbox transmission choice would appeal to way more customers than a manual + powershift!!!

 

 

 

Strange... I feel inversely the same...

 

Getting rid of auto trans would really bring the prices down

.

And thin out the road traffic.. \\

 

 

 

A win-win idea.

[RangerM]

if they are so rare, and people like you are so rare, why should car companies spend money designing cars with manual transmissions, test them, certify them with the EPA, and other costly homologation that comes with selling production cars in the market?

Simple. Because there is sufficient demand with which the automakers can make money doing it.

imo they should just get rid of them!!! a powershift + slushbox transmission choice would appeal to way more customers than a manual + powershift!!!

Fortunately, you aren't doing the product planning, so those of us who prefer a manual can still get a manual.

Edited June 26, 2011 by RangerM

[Edstock]

Strange... I feel inversely the same...

 

Getting rid of auto trans would really bring the prices down

.

And thin out the road traffic.. \\

 

 

 

A win-win idea.

 

 

 

 

With non-synchro gears, too, like a mid-60's Can-Am Huffaker or Hewland transaxle.

[Biker16]

Well, you just lost all credibility with me. I've seen so many reviews that put iOS ahead of WP7 in terms of ease of use, and just works factor, it isn't even funny. Having used enough versions of Windows, I can tell you, they're probably right.

 

as a user of WP7 I think it is the closest any any Os has gotten to surpassing IOS.

 

I believe when Mango arrives It WILLsurrpass IOS.

 

http://gizmodo.com/5813901/the-next-windows-phone-its-pretty-great

 

the concept of inter active tiles is simply a game changer.

 

The OS is smooth, and responsive, and is not laden with the NEED of ANdroid devices to have high performance specs to perform adequately.

 

the quality of the apps and interface are a step forward for mobile phones.

 

IOS is smooth crisp and stable, so is WP7.

[suv_guy_19]

well, no games, not much browsing, not much applications, just maps, phone calls, messages, etc. it does last a week. You can't do that with a droid.

 

You can't do that with an iPhone either.

[Anthony]

My iPhone has never made it past 2-3 days. EVER.