papilgee4evaeva Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Dude, you're hilarious! You can't handle the heat, but you just can't stay out of the kitchen! I was just getting ready to welcome him back. :shrug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Car Examiner Posted February 5, 2014 Author Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) I don't remember what the article specifically said, but I recall the lack of buttons being mentioned. On a side note, I find the setup for the reviews he posts absolutely terrible....you have to click several different links to hopefully get to the summation of the vehicles, let alone trying to find a review of each car. A simpler "next" link progressing through reviews of each car would be better, IMO). Anyway....back to MFT....the lack of buttons is a fair criticism. We've seen Ford move back to buttons. I wonder if creating indents/bulges in various areas (while retaining touch sensitive controls) would've worked as well Reliability and responsiveness is definitely a fair criticism, but refusal on the part of reviewers to actually sit with and learn the system for more than 2 minutes is not necessarily the system's fault. I'm always trying to make the formatting better, but I'm not sure what your complaint is. There is a "next" link below every full review, and in the summary reviews there are big "next" and "previous" arrows. On the introduction page and the two ranking summaries, you can click on the link to every individual car if you don't want to go through the whole thing in order, and every page has a link back to both of those two. What would work better for you, do you think? About MFT -- touch-sensitive controls with ridges is what Toyota has in the Avalon, and it works a little bit better. But there's still the chance of brushing against the wrong control, and not knowing as well whether you've hit the button you wanted, especially when the response isn't the swiftest. Edited February 5, 2014 by DC Car Examiner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 About MFT -- touch-sensitive controls with ridges is what Toyota has in the Avalon, and it works a little bit better. But there's still the chance of brushing against the wrong control, and not knowing as well whether you've hit the button you wanted, especially when the response isn't the swiftest. The touch screen is often another matter, but I've always found the touch buttons below the screen have always responded almost instantly in my Edge, even back in 2011 before Ford released the very first update. I do agree with your suggestion that the wrong button can be pushed by accident relatively easily though, in particular the track change buttons in the center of the volume knob. I have no complaints about them returning to physical buttons, so long as it's done attractively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spotdog14 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I'm always trying to make the formatting better, but I'm not sure what your complaint is. There is a "next" link below every full review, and in the summary reviews there are big "next" and "previous" arrows. On the introduction page and the two ranking summaries, you can click on the link to every individual car if you don't want to go through the whole thing in order, and every page has a link back to both of those two. What would work better for you, do you think? About MFT -- touch-sensitive controls with ridges is what Toyota has in the Avalon, and it works a little bit better. But there's still the chance of brushing against the wrong control, and not knowing as well whether you've hit the button you wanted, especially when the response isn't the swiftest. I agree, the layout of the website is horrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I'm always trying to make the formatting better, but I'm not sure what your complaint is. There is a "next" link below every full review, and in the summary reviews there are big "next" and "previous" arrows. On the introduction page and the two ranking summaries, you can click on the link to every individual car if you don't want to go through the whole thing in order, and every page has a link back to both of those two. What would work better for you, do you think? About MFT -- touch-sensitive controls with ridges is what Toyota has in the Avalon, and it works a little bit better. But there's still the chance of brushing against the wrong control, and not knowing as well whether you've hit the button you wanted, especially when the response isn't the swiftest. Let me take a look again, and I can send you a PM with some thoughts as to not take over this thread. I just know in the past, I've not gone past the first page of your review even if I want to because I've found it confusing to navigate. I understand those thoughts. My folks have a 2014 Explorer with the MFT panel and I've found it responds quickly when you push a "button." I can definitely understand the uncertainty of button location with the flat panel. Just curious, do you have the same complaints with Cadillac's CUE system which also uses touch sensitive buttons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Car Examiner Posted February 5, 2014 Author Share Posted February 5, 2014 Let me take a look again, and I can send you a PM with some thoughts as to not take over this thread. I just know in the past, I've not gone past the first page of your review even if I want to because I've found it confusing to navigate. I understand those thoughts. My folks have a 2014 Explorer with the MFT panel and I've found it responds quickly when you push a "button." I can definitely understand the uncertainty of button location with the flat panel. Just curious, do you have the same complaints with Cadillac's CUE system which also uses touch sensitive buttons? I actually wouldn't mind if you posted the criticisms here in case anyone else wanted to agree/disagree. I have changed the layout around over the years and it seems that feedback had improved over time. About CUE, I've only played around while parked as I haven't driven any of the latest Cadillacs. So that's not the best measure. They do have the vibration feature when you touch a button, but it still seems like a workaround to a problem that never needed to exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) I actually wouldn't mind if you posted the criticisms here in case anyone else wanted to agree/disagree. I have changed the layout around over the years and it seems that feedback had improved over time. About CUE, I've only played around while parked as I haven't driven any of the latest Cadillacs. So that's not the best measure. They do have the vibration feature when you touch a button, but it still seems like a workaround to a problem that never needed to exist. I've not used CUE except for briefly playing with it at auto shows when there is power in the car, so I was just curious as to your take, given its similar implementation. ------- Regarding the article/page setup....I'll put discussion/explanation comments in regular text, and suggestions in bolded text. When I click the link provided (http://www.examiner.com/list/comparison-review-ten-large-sedans-the-best-and-the-worst), I'm linked to the introduction page. That's fine, and is to be expected. However, as I finish reading that introduction, I then am presented with a list of links, which at first glance, appear to be links to other reviews you've done.....I know it says "more from this comparison," but look below that series of links, and you will see "See also" with links to other reviews. To me, that list of associated reviews for the CURRENT comparison gets lost amongst the list of OTHER comparisons you've done......meaning, at first glance, I disregard that entire series of links simply because generally that is where most webpages (yours included) put their "see also" links that I'm usually not interested in, so I'm then left wondering where the rest of the review is. Now depending on what mood I'm in, I may look more thoroughly and realize oh there's the associated pages, but I'm guessing many others may not realize that either. I hope that's making sense. Then on top of that, the way the list of car names (which are, in fact, the individual vehicle reviews) is presented, it strikes me as simply a "tagged" list of names of vehicles. It doesn't strike me as a location for individual reviews of each vehicle. If nothing else, I'd suggest somehow better separating the links associated with the current comparison from the "see also" links. That alone I think would make it more organized than what looks like a random pile of links at the bottom of the article. Ok....now that I look at it again, when you click the link for an individual review, I do now see the "next" or "previous" link you said you did have. Again, I never even saw it, because for me it got lost in the large number of links you have placed at the bottom of the review. I counted 14 links piled down there on one review. The next review and previous review links are not clearly marked in comparison to the 12 other links down there. When I read a review that has multiple pages (one for each car, one overall, etc. etc.), I don't want to have to hunt for how to get to the next section. I am much less inclined to read the entire review if I struggle to figure out how to navigate through it. I'd suggest having the reader proceed from the introduction page to the #10 car review with a large yellow-orange (or whatever color, that's just the one on the page currently) box that says "10th Place -->" Then on the next page have "<-- introduction" and "9th place -->" clearly marked, and continue on down to 1st place, at which point, you could then provide another clearly marked link to "Rating the 10 large sedans", and then from that page "Ranking the 10 large sedans" Alternatively, if you didn't want to rearrange the setup, you could instead on each page simply having a large "previous review" and "next review" link within a different color box (you could use that yellow-orange color) so it's very clear how to navigate through it. The arrangement of the pages could be altered....for instance, if you'd rather have the "rating", "ranking", and "quick review" pages at the front before the full review of each car, and then shift into the "10" "9" "8"....format, that's fine too, or you don't have to use the "countdown" format if you don't like that. My key point is to just make the progression from one page of the overall comparison to the next very easy to understand and clearly marked, rather than hidden amongst over a dozen links as it currently is. I hope that made sense and helps some. Others may have differing views/thoughts/etc., but those are mine. Edited February 5, 2014 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtisH Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I'm not going to quote rmc's post, but wanted to mention that I agree with his comments. If you could do something similar to his suggestions, I think it would help a lot. Disclaimer: I develop web sites/services for a living. I do not design the UI. We have some really good UI guys and I gladly let them handle it. Intuitive design is not easy. Keep at it. You'll get there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Unknown caller was fixed with the latest MFT update. I still have the problem intermittently after the update. As for MFT...once again nearly every single control on it (outside of the heated/cooled seats and heated steering wheel) have a physical button that you can press to make it do what you want it to do. Once its setup and ready to go, you don't need to mess with it. The voice commands can be a PIA if you don't use them every day, because it wants it in a certain context...just like the Xbox One does. The Audio controls are pretty basic, but the Nav Voice commands are a Pain IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Car Examiner Posted February 6, 2014 Author Share Posted February 6, 2014 I've not used CUE except for briefly playing with it at auto shows when there is power in the car, so I was just curious as to your take, given its similar implementation. ------- Regarding the article/page setup....I'll put discussion/explanation comments in regular text, and suggestions in bolded text. When I click the link provided (http://www.examiner.com/list/comparison-review-ten-large-sedans-the-best-and-the-worst), I'm linked to the introduction page. That's fine, and is to be expected. However, as I finish reading that introduction, I then am presented with a list of links, which at first glance, appear to be links to other reviews you've done.....I know it says "more from this comparison," but look below that series of links, and you will see "See also" with links to other reviews. To me, that list of associated reviews for the CURRENT comparison gets lost amongst the list of OTHER comparisons you've done......meaning, at first glance, I disregard that entire series of links simply because generally that is where most webpages (yours included) put their "see also" links that I'm usually not interested in, so I'm then left wondering where the rest of the review is. Now depending on what mood I'm in, I may look more thoroughly and realize oh there's the associated pages, but I'm guessing many others may not realize that either. I hope that's making sense. Then on top of that, the way the list of car names (which are, in fact, the individual vehicle reviews) is presented, it strikes me as simply a "tagged" list of names of vehicles. It doesn't strike me as a location for individual reviews of each vehicle. If nothing else, I'd suggest somehow better separating the links associated with the current comparison from the "see also" links. That alone I think would make it more organized than what looks like a random pile of links at the bottom of the article. Ok....now that I look at it again, when you click the link for an individual review, I do now see the "next" or "previous" link you said you did have. Again, I never even saw it, because for me it got lost in the large number of links you have placed at the bottom of the review. I counted 14 links piled down there on one review. The next review and previous review links are not clearly marked in comparison to the 12 other links down there. When I read a review that has multiple pages (one for each car, one overall, etc. etc.), I don't want to have to hunt for how to get to the next section. I am much less inclined to read the entire review if I struggle to figure out how to navigate through it. I'd suggest having the reader proceed from the introduction page to the #10 car review with a large yellow-orange (or whatever color, that's just the one on the page currently) box that says "10th Place -->" Then on the next page have "<-- introduction" and "9th place -->" clearly marked, and continue on down to 1st place, at which point, you could then provide another clearly marked link to "Rating the 10 large sedans", and then from that page "Ranking the 10 large sedans" Alternatively, if you didn't want to rearrange the setup, you could instead on each page simply having a large "previous review" and "next review" link within a different color box (you could use that yellow-orange color) so it's very clear how to navigate through it. The arrangement of the pages could be altered....for instance, if you'd rather have the "rating", "ranking", and "quick review" pages at the front before the full review of each car, and then shift into the "10" "9" "8"....format, that's fine too, or you don't have to use the "countdown" format if you don't like that. My key point is to just make the progression from one page of the overall comparison to the next very easy to understand and clearly marked, rather than hidden amongst over a dozen links as it currently is. I hope that made sense and helps some. Others may have differing views/thoughts/etc., but those are mine. The point about distinguishing which links mean what at first glance is a valid one. Maybe the solution is to have fewer links regarding the comparison on each page -- the idea behind that was to let people jump around the comparison if they didn't want to go in order. Also, a lot of traffic comes into the individual reviews via Google rather than starting at the introduction, so I want the main articles to be highlighted. But....I want everything to be highlighted....so I can see how that becomes a muddle. One thing I sadly can't do is anything more with text/arrows, because the Examiner.com publishing tool gives very few options. Bold and italics are the only options -- no change in font, text size, or text color. Nor does it let you make boxes or any other formatting but bullets and numbering. The box I'm typing in right now to compose this post is far more advanced than what I'm offered for an Examiner.com article. Meanwhile, the summary reviews are in a format designed for multi-page articles, but it's not customizable and only allows for one photo instead of a gallery, so that doesn't work for the full write-ups. ------- Anyway, within the bounds of what the site will let me do, would it be an improvement to rearrange some things? So here's what the order is now, for a sample article: [Last sentence of review] Overall grade: B- - More photos of the 2014 Toyota Avalon Limited - Report card: Rating the Avalon -- how does it compare in different ways, such as comfort, performance, and fuel economy? - Report card: Ranking the Avalon -- how does it stack up for different types of buyers? More from this comparison: - Previous review: 2014 Nissan Maxima 3.5 SV (7th place) - Next review: 2014 Buick LaCrosse Leather (5th place) - Introduction - Rating the ten large sedans - Ranking the ten large sedans - Quick summaries of the ten large sedans: Pros, cons, conclusions See also: [links to reviews of other Toyotas] [specs/data] So how about if it were: [Last sentence of review] Overall grade: B- - Previous review: 2014 Nissan Maxima 3.5 SV (7th place) - Next review: 2014 Buick LaCrosse Leather (5th place) - Introduction to this comparison More about the 2014 Toyota Avalon Limited: - Photo gallery - Report card -- how does it compare in different ways, such as comfort, performance, and fuel economy? - Report card -- how does it stack up for different types of buyers? More from this comparison: - Rating the ten large sedans - Ranking the ten large sedans - Quick summaries of the ten large sedans: Pros, cons, conclusions [specs/data] [links to reviews of other Toyotas] Or would you recommend omitting "more from this comparison" entirely, and/or distributing those links throughout the article? That is to say, finding article text they'd make sense near? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev-Mo Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 (edited) Brady, Regarding Taurus road manners and handling and the need for a new Taurus Got to thinking – we hear all the time that the Taurus PI is the clear winner in performance and handling tests by Police Departments all over the country, the owners love them and in the attached link Carl Edwards seems to have no problem enjoying the handling of the car. Begs the question; what makes you the authority when it comes to cars road manners? Perhaps you might ask to ride in the passenger seat with Carl before judging next time. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmrkBXy5w28&list=PL8080B869BFB04C0D&index=5 Edited February 6, 2014 by Kev-Mo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 The point about distinguishing which links mean what at first glance is a valid one. Maybe the solution is to have fewer links regarding the comparison on each page -- the idea behind that was to let people jump around the comparison if they didn't want to go in order. Also, a lot of traffic comes into the individual reviews via Google rather than starting at the introduction, so I want the main articles to be highlighted. But....I want everything to be highlighted....so I can see how that becomes a muddle. One thing I sadly can't do is anything more with text/arrows, because the Examiner.com publishing tool gives very few options. Bold and italics are the only options -- no change in font, text size, or text color. Nor does it let you make boxes or any other formatting but bullets and numbering. The box I'm typing in right now to compose this post is far more advanced than what I'm offered for an Examiner.com article. Meanwhile, the summary reviews are in a format designed for multi-page articles, but it's not customizable and only allows for one photo instead of a gallery, so that doesn't work for the full write-ups. ------- Anyway, within the bounds of what the site will let me do, would it be an improvement to rearrange some things? So here's what the order is now, for a sample article: [Last sentence of review] Overall grade: B- - More photos of the 2014 Toyota Avalon Limited - Report card: Rating the Avalon -- how does it compare in different ways, such as comfort, performance, and fuel economy? - Report card: Ranking the Avalon -- how does it stack up for different types of buyers? More from this comparison: - Previous review: 2014 Nissan Maxima 3.5 SV (7th place) - Next review: 2014 Buick LaCrosse Leather (5th place) - Introduction - Rating the ten large sedans - Ranking the ten large sedans - Quick summaries of the ten large sedans: Pros, cons, conclusions See also: [links to reviews of other Toyotas] [specs/data] So how about if it were: [Last sentence of review] Overall grade: B- - Previous review: 2014 Nissan Maxima 3.5 SV (7th place) - Next review: 2014 Buick LaCrosse Leather (5th place) - Introduction to this comparison More about the 2014 Toyota Avalon Limited: - Photo gallery - Report card -- how does it compare in different ways, such as comfort, performance, and fuel economy? - Report card -- how does it stack up for different types of buyers? More from this comparison: - Rating the ten large sedans - Ranking the ten large sedans - Quick summaries of the ten large sedans: Pros, cons, conclusions [specs/data] [links to reviews of other Toyotas] Or would you recommend omitting "more from this comparison" entirely, and/or distributing those links throughout the article? That is to say, finding article text they'd make sense near? Well that sucks that you're so limited. I understand wanting to allow people to jump around/skip sections if they want to. Yes, I think the proposed changes you put here might help it be more clear....I now understand how tough it is to make it clearer given your limitations Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1122union Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 I think Ford has given up on the car. When is the last time anyone has seen a TV AD for the Taurus? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosetang Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 I don't recall seeing much advertising for the current Taurus since its MCE. The small cars and the Fusion all sorta stole the spotlight, with good reason. I still like the Taurus in many ways and would rather have a SHO than the competition's top trim models if I were looking in that segment, but the car's definitely running out of steam and really if I'm buying something bigger than a Fusion it's gonna say "EXPLORER" on the badge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 The question would be, is Ford going to dump the Taurus as we know it? They aren't spending much on advertising, probably depending on Interceptors just to get it's unit count up. Have all these police agencies stocking up on parts and everything, to just go ahead and dump the vehicle and move on an extended Fusion platform based vehicle, and start the whole Interceptor retro-fits with that vehicle. And seriously, we know how robust the Volvo platform has been for Ford, would police agencies go to a Fusion platform based vehicle, or maybe Ford would just dump having a sedan for Interceptor duty and just keep it to the Explorer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 The question would be, is Ford going to dump the Taurus as we know it? AFAIK, the current sled gets a new platform in about 18 months or so. As to advertising, it seems that Toyota isn't doing a lot to push its Avalon, but I could be mistaken. We'll know soon enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgts Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 The question would be, is Ford going to dump the Taurus as we know it? They aren't spending much on advertising, probably depending on Interceptors just to get it's unit count up. Have all these police agencies stocking up on parts and everything, to just go ahead and dump the vehicle and move on an extended Fusion platform based vehicle, and start the whole Interceptor retro-fits with that vehicle. And seriously, we know how robust the Volvo platform has been for Ford, would police agencies go to a Fusion platform based vehicle, or maybe Ford would just dump having a sedan for Interceptor duty and just keep it to the Explorer? Yep, i think the point of it. Everytime the retail Taurus gets updates and redesigns, the PI gets them to making it cost effective. The CV couldnt get needed updates because the retail verson didnt get them. I strongly think when the new retail Taurus/Explorer is out the new PIs will hit the streets too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 Yep, i think the point of it. Everytime the retail Taurus gets updates and redesigns, the PI gets them to making it cost effective. The CV couldnt get needed updates because the retail verson didnt get them. I strongly think when the new retail Taurus/Explorer is out the new PIs will hit the streets too. They're probably developing both models as we speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Yep, i think the point of it. Everytime the retail Taurus gets updates and redesigns, the PI gets them to making it cost effective. The CV couldnt get needed updates because the retail verson didnt get them. I strongly think when the new retail Taurus/Explorer is out the new PIs will hit the streets too. They're probably developing both models as we speak. I seriously doubt that is happening. The Explorer hasn't even had an MCE refresh yet and only came onto the market in very late in 2011(?) With the Taurus and MKS moving Flat Rock come end of next year, that leaves Chicago without any product besides the PI/PIU/Explorer. I see the Explorer (along with the PI/PIU) solidering on till 2018 or so, when the Explorer moves to a stretched out Edge Platform (I'd expect it to become a three row Edge for all intents) and the PI/PIU move over to that platform also... The one thing that needs to be settled is what is going to happen with the Flex/MKT line at Oakville? Is Edge/MKX production going to be enough for them to keep the plant running at 2-3 shifts..even though the Flex/MKT didn't sell in huge numbers, they could still find something else to build there that would sell better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.