HUD navigation could be cool, but anything that takes attention from driving like showing text messages is a terrible idea and should be banned. Distracted driving is incredibly dangerous. Even hands free phone calls are distracting.
In France they're illegal around (and visible from) express roads (roads with central separators and at least 2 lanes each ways, generally limited to 110km/h) and highways (same but with more stringent sizing specs, extensive shoulders and usually speed-limited to 130km/h), within 40 meters in cities and 200 meters outside.
They are also banned out of urban zones in Spain. There is a survivor sign that was allowed to stay, "El Toro de Osborne". That's how we do it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_bull
I think so, yes, but I feel this way primarily for aesthetic reasons.
I actually find those permanent-installation LED government road signs warning of lane closures and advising of average travel times to be worse because the angle at which they're viewable tends to be terrible and require you to pay more attention to read them than they should.
Well, if hand free phone calls are distracting because you're holding a conversation, we should ban talking to your passengers on a car too, right? Even driving with passengers should be banned just in case, and all vehicles be single-seaters or have soundproof glass between the driver and passengers.
Music is pretty distracting to some people. Car stereos should definitely be banned too.
To be fair, both having a conversation and listening to music keep me alert when driving. Yes, it might also produce cognitive overload, but in my case it's definitely better than cognitive underload (boredom).
You know what's by far the most distracting thing to me while driving? Constantly checking my speedometer. In some areas I do it constantly, out of fear of getting a speeding ticket. I don't even want to speed!
This argument fails repeated testing. It turns out that human-human conversation involves both parties paying attention to the environment and co-operating to insert pauses and situational awareness. In essence, h-h communication in a car requires much less cognitive load on the driver because a large part of it becomes shared.
We've all seen this fail at times too. That's when the driver has to tell the passenger to stop talking so they can concentrate on directions or signage, etc.
> In contrast, the University of Illinois meta-analysis concluded that passenger conversations were just as costly to driving performance as cell phone ones.
> AAA ranks passengers as the third most reported cause of distraction-related accidents at 11 percent, compared to 1.5 percent for cellular telephones.
> A simulation study funded by the American Transportation Research Board concluded that driving events that require urgent responses may be influenced by in-vehicle conversations, and that there is little practical evidence that passengers adjusted their conversations to changes in the traffic.
both of the studies referenced there were from a decade ago - 2004 and 2006. I wonder what the numbers would be today, given that there's so many more cellphones on the road.
Haven't seen any actual numbers yet, but the 'human conversation' thing - 11% - how many of those involved children in the back seats distracting the driver?
not only are there more phones on the road. they're almost all touch screen (no tactile response = more likely to look at it to use it) and they're almost all smart phones, so morons like the one in the video can "compose tweets" while driving.
May I recommend that instead of relying on someone's third-hand interpretation in Wikipedia, you prefer to refer to the underlying source, or better yet since that source is itself only a meta-analysis in this case, to the original primary research?
For example, what the meta-analysis paper actually says is:
"From our analyses, in-vehicle (passenger) conversations were just as costly to driving performance as were remote (cell phone) conversations. This suggests that passengers, at least in those studies explored here, did not moderate their conversation in such a way as to alleviate the costs (as compared with remote conversers). These results must be interpreted with caution, however, given that relatively few studies directly examined the impact of passenger conversations."
If you look at their table of the original research they are working from, you can clearly see why they included that cautionary note.
Alternatively, a few minutes with Google Scholar will get you numerous primary sources that show a clear distinction between the effects of remote conversation and the effects of passenger interaction. Some studies suggest that passengers who don't moderate their conversation still have a negative effect, but hardly anyone has data that implies an effect as bad as cell phone conversations. Other studies found evidence that passengers can also be a benefit, for example warning an insufficiently attentive driver of a hazard they had failed to recognise themselves.
There is unfortunately not very much research into more specific conditions when passengers may prove to be a particularly serious distraction. For example, we know that young and inexperienced drivers are disproportionately likely to have accidents, but we don't yet know for sure whether passengers of a similar age are disproportionately likely to be a significant distraction. There is some evidence to suggest that this is at least a plausible theory, and in some places young and inexperienced drivers are now limited in the passengers they can take when they first start driving unsupervised.
>>That's when the driver has to tell the passenger to stop talking so they can concentrate on directions or signage, etc.
When I do it to my mother she gets cross and starts talking even more, which is even more distracting. There is no good way out of this situation I am afraid. Some people have absolutely no situational awareness and are actively distracting as passengers.
In my opinion passengers are far better than phone calls because the passenger has contextual awareness of what's happening while you're driving. He or she will pause a sentence while you're trying to merge onto the freeway, for example.
You're assuming they a: notice and pay attention to the road, and b: they're familiar with how to drive, so know that is a trickier maneuver, and c: that they know how well you drive, so can contextualize a pause based on your ability.
From The Wikipedia entry on mobile phones and driving: "The NHTSA considers distracted driving to include some of the following as distractions: other occupants in the car, eating, drinking, smoking, adjusting radio, adjusting environmental control, reaching for object in car, and cell phone use."
When I was a kid and my dad was driving and had to make a left turn or perform some other maneuver that required his full attention, he'd ask everyone in the car to be quiet. This was a man that raced automobiles as a hobby and worked in professional racing at the highest levels his entire life.
I've had more near misses in my car caused by distractions from other people physically inside the car than when I'm physically alone - that includes all forms of social interaction via a mobile device. To count the accidents I've been involved in or had near misses, virtually all of them have been caused by someone in my vehicle causing me take my eyes off the road at just the wrong moment - because instinct can cause you to react badly at just the wrong time and boom! However, a cell phone ringing or an email/text coming in has never caused me to think "Holy shit, I must check who that is right now this second, forget that the guy 25 feet in front of me just hit his brakes hard. I'll figure that out in a minute!"
Of course, I do realize that there are accidents caused by texting/emailing and driving at the same time, and as such, I do think it should be banned everywhere. When you're driving, your one and only concern should be what's going on around your vehicle.
Should we ban talking to your passengers in your car too? Perhaps. While we're at it, could we also ban our kids from fighting in the back seat and bothering us with "Daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy! Can I have a cookie?" Would such a ban be realistic? No, of course it wouldn't. If you could, would it significantly reduce the number of accidents on our roads? If my own experience is anything to go by, it most certainly would.
All we can do is assess crash statistics, ban those activities that can reasonably be banned where it would reduce in a reduction in those statistics.
Is it reasonable to ban the use of cell phones and all forms of mobile communication while driving? Absolutely. We used to drive all the time without phones in the car. We used to leave our houses without the ability to communicate at all until we got back to a land line. I think in extenuating circumstances, it can be overlooked, but if the statistics show that mobile device usage behind the wheel of a car results in accidents, we can easily go back to not using them when we're behind the wheel of the car. Will we? I'd say it's unlikely given the number of drivers I passed this morning, still holding their cell phones to their ears - despite this behaviour being banned in this province since 2010, with fines as heavy as $1,000 and 3 demerit points.
It's easy to say "You know what the most distracting thing is...?" but honestly, you can't remove all distracting things. All you can do is remove as many of them as you can reasonably remove and do your best to mitigate the risk of the remainder.
I do think that having my nav and my speedometer on the HUD would be far better though.
You are being disingenuous. Of course some of your points make sense in certain circumstances.
> we should ban talking to your passengers on a car too, right
That genie is already out of the bottle and would be impractical to implement. In any case it far less distracting talking to a passenger than trying to reply to a text or conducting what may be a serious conversation on a phone. Additionally the passenger can shut up instantly if (s)he sees a situation developing or even help bring your attention to it.
> both having a conversation and listening to music keep me alert when driving
On a long, boring trip, with very little to concentrate on, it can make sense to have the radio playing and someone talking to you. However on a rainy evening, in fast moving traffic, that same radio and passenger could get you killed and others with you. It is easy to turn off and ignore the radio and to ask your passenger, who can see the danger to please keep quiet for a while. It is a lot more difficult to ignore your phone when expecting that important call under these conditions.
> far the most distracting thing to me while driving? Constantly checking my speedometer
Seriously? Glancing at your speedometer is more distracting than a phone? Besides, glancing at your speedometer for a second carries far less risk than answering a text and having a fight with your girlfriend on the phone.
>>Additionally the passenger can shut up instantly if (s)he sees a situation developing or even help bring your attention to it.
If they know what to look for. Doesn't work with children, people who don't drive themselves so they have no idea what to look out for, or even worse, it can work the other way around, when someone yells "WATCH OUT" at the top of their lungs because they perceive danger, even though you were not in any(saying hi to all my elderly relatives here).
> we should ban talking to your passengers on a car too, right
You may be on to something. You've seen the number of people out there who actually turn to face their passengers full on while driving, right?
Actually it's pretty odd. I don't look at the passenger when I'm driving, though of course we'll converse. Even at stop lights, I spend more time checking the light and my rear view mirror than I do looking at my passenger. My responsibility as a driver requires me to do so when I'm driving, whether it's slow, fast or stopped.
This makes a lot of people noticeably uncomfortable.
I've taken to actually turning my face slightly towards people periodically, while keeping eyes ahead -- just to avoid creating a sense of awkwardness.
This. I can't look at the passenger ether when I'm driving, even on very familiar roads. I never thought this is awkward - but if the passenger is not a friend/ close acquaintance, I mention it casually that I am in fact listening to them even if I'm not looking at them.
The best I could do is keep nodding or make agreeing sounds.
I've long thought that it should be illegal to play any sort of siren on the radio. I can't tell you how many times I've gone into "fight or flight" mode because of some new hiphop single.
I agree. Navdy should round up all the people in Werner Herzog's texting documentary, ask them to endorse their product, and post that video on their website.
So where were you fear-mongers when car radios were introduced, or when drive-thrus and eating while you drive was introduced, or when tape players/CD players were introduced, or when mapping/full touchscreen devices in cars were introduced?
This whole "distracted driving" thing is horseshit. If the road is your PRIMARY focus than you can do all of the things I just mentioned and not die. It's really that easy.
but it's no worse than several displays, screens and buttons that area already present in your car that divert your attention even more than a HUD would.
Yep anything that engages your language processing: speaking, listening to conversations, singing, etc. interferes with your ability to process what's going on in front of you. Carrying on any sort of conversation, hands-free or no, impairs reaction time and your ability to drive safely.
You're not supposed to talk to bus drivers without good reason, and this is partially why.
I have a HUD in my car - it is great for navigation events and alerts. Turn arrows, street names and lane restrictions are all displayed when navigating. When not navigating it shows speed and alerts. Using the steering controls you can scroll through radio/media options. The image appears to be farther away than what is displayed in this product. That is a very important distinction. By appearing farther away you needn't refocus every time you glance slightly down to view the HUD data. This looks like a translucent screen right in front of the wheel. Not good.
They mention on the site that the image is focused into the distance. Perhaps the imagery they currently have is just poorly designed, but hopefully it's closer to your experience when it ships.
I'm not sure that showing off how your new product can make texting while driving easier is the best idea. The whole hands free debate isn't about literally keeping your hands free of objects, it's the psychological distraction of texting/talking/browsing that causes the safety issues. If it were just about keeping your hands free to stay on the steering wheel, people with one arm wouldn't be allowed to drive.
Much of the current public outreach really does focus on people taking their eyes off the road and missing things [0]. Usually in pretty graphic ways [1]. The other main focus is navigation in the car, which pretty much everyone does now, so making that safer is a win.
I wonder to what degree navigation is a fundamentally different case.
A given driver on a given trip is well-shown to be more attentive to traffic and less disruptive if you deny them distractions. (conversation, radio, food, etc)
But it seems plausible that a lost driver is a special case and may be less attentive and more disruptive to traffic if you deny them a navigational aid.
Anecdotally that feels true, though I don't know if it's been studied specifically.
as a general hacker with an interest in learning whatever I can, I am also interested in how one would go about making one. it could be doable just onto a plain windshield, right?
> it could be doable just onto a plain windshield, right?
My gut tells me you'd need some kind of reflecting sheet stuck in the windshield or the light would just go through. My guess is the screen in Navdy is actually reflecting light polarized in a specific angle, but I could be completely wrong.
Also, it would be harder because windshields are not planar nor perpendicular to the light source, which distorts the projected image. You'd have to calibrate it constantly, I guess that's why Navdy has a screen.
There's also the law. I believe you can't stick things to the windshield for safety reasons, specially if they occlude light.
It seems the optics might not be that hard: a mini-projector, a mirror (though I don't know why you wouldn't just project the light directly) and somewhere to reflect the light.
I think this is a really good alternative. While I do believe that anything that takes away from your attention (texting) while driving, should be banned. It's always going to be a problem whether there is a law against it or not.
It comes down to.. would I rather someone be sending a text while looking down at their phone. Or would I feel better about someone sending a text, a message that's being sent regardless, while looking ahead in front of them.
When I read "HUD for your car" I imagined a super cool HUD like the ones in nearly-sci-fi jets showing actually useful info about my crazy driving skills, other objects in sight, about routes and parking stuff, and about the car itself. I really didn't see it coming when it showed people using social media apps. But it's alright as long as it makes HUD displays more popular anyway... I guess!
>showing actually useful info about my crazy driving skills,...
Thanks for the laugh :-)!
This was my first thought as well. I saw a Mercedes the other day with the "lane change assist."
Rather hilariously: I was behind the Mercedes at a right turn, and you could see the "danger" light in her mirror indicating that my little sedan was in the blindspot of her enormous GLK.
(Ironically the tech itself was a distraction _to me_ because I was trying to figure out where the sensor package was, and how sensitive the instrumentation was. I had never seen it that closely before -- perhaps I should go to a Mercedes dealership.)
I want that sort of tech on every glass surface of the car. Anywhere I can see a vehicle: I should be able to see "potential hazard information."
You might change your mind if you ever have the opportunity to rent a car that has a HUD - having just the navigation directions on the windshield is great, your eyes never leave the road.
Rolls Royce, BMW, and even Chevrolets (Corvettes and Camaros) come with HUDs of various sophistication.
Having driven HUD cars on several 800+ mls roadtrips, i prefer BMW one the most. Camaro (2012 model) was so distracting, i had to turn it off due to glare at night.
BMW HUD is truly useful, but youre NOT TRULY looking at the road while looking at it - your eyes are focusing on a point in road that's only about 50 feet from you. Granted that's better than your lap where the cell phone is, its still not enough time to react to something happening in front at highway speeds - so as many have said, bringing texts/full voice interaction to this thing strikes me as dubious.
Also, wouldn't cops consider it to be a windshield obstruction? Its a giant box on top of the instrument cluster... many petite members of our society barely clear the steering wheel with their eyes...
PS: After about a week with a HUD you'll have a hard time going back to a car without one, but i don't ever see how this would be safe for anything except GPS.
Lastly, MSRP looks to be ~$450 - which is not far from integrated navi system (with which you get proper Bluetooth, traffic, no data plan requirements, and so on).
Really cool, I plan to get something like this as soon as it becomes available, my money is here, please post when you have product I can order and is reviewed by Ars or Engadget.
Interesting idea, but certainly the demonstrated applications seem to be awful. Now, a HUD with map and information about upcoming traffic & road conditions would be useful.
Woah. So my Maxima can become as cool as my buddy's Z06 for the low, low price of $300? Interesting. Having a tach thrown onto the windshield is much preferable to squinting down through the steering wheel into Nissan's lovely (not), isolated pods. Keeping both eyes on the road while shifting into 2nd a hair past the redline? Nice.
having felt prey to the "ok google now" scam i will pass this one.
i know i will only be able to control minimal navigation and calls options.
no other app will ever play along. e.g. you skype calls will either block everything or only show up on your phone screen... to the point integration is so bad you still have your phone on the holder next to that screen and in the end you are using your phone directly more than that projector.
Why can't I just have a list of "high priority apps" and "low priority apps", or even just "highest priority" and "everything else."
It's not something an app can solve; but I personally spend a long time trying to ensure that my phone is safe to use as a navigational aid. Currently this usually includes voiding my warranty (to root, jailbreak, etc.) so that I can bypass the stock dialer. -- That just feels _wrong_ to me. I should not be voiding my warranty to make a device safer.
The Navdy video has no explanation of what they use. The commenter linked to a YouTube video about his project, in which they say they used 60/40 beam splitter glass.
My 2010 Prius has little monochrome HUD showing speed, navigation info, and power consumption (configurable). Although less fancy than Navdy, it's really useful because you will always see the road in background. Should become a standard in every car.
Side note: I'm always annoyed that Siri insists I read a preview of what it thinks I want a text message to say. Otherwise texting could be completely voice based.
Why can't it read the message back to me? That would give me a rough idea of whether Siri got it right?
I'm not sure what triggers it... but when I'm in my car, Siri reads things back to me. So I don't know if it applies equally to bluetooth headsets or hands-free mode in my car. I don't know enough about Bluetooth profiles to say without some extra Googling.
As soon as I saw that it combines OBD II information from the car with turn-by-turn information from Google Maps... and they offer a 30-day money-back guarantee upon receiving it... sold.
I wish it had more about the legality of this beyond: "Some states may also have legal restrictions regarding where accessories may be mounted on the dashboard"
224 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 261 ms ] threadhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safet...
So advertisements beside roads should be banned?
I actually find those permanent-installation LED government road signs warning of lane closures and advising of average travel times to be worse because the angle at which they're viewable tends to be terrible and require you to pay more attention to read them than they should.
Music is pretty distracting to some people. Car stereos should definitely be banned too.
To be fair, both having a conversation and listening to music keep me alert when driving. Yes, it might also produce cognitive overload, but in my case it's definitely better than cognitive underload (boredom).
You know what's by far the most distracting thing to me while driving? Constantly checking my speedometer. In some areas I do it constantly, out of fear of getting a speeding ticket. I don't even want to speed!
We've all seen this fail at times too. That's when the driver has to tell the passenger to stop talking so they can concentrate on directions or signage, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safet...
Quoting:
> In contrast, the University of Illinois meta-analysis concluded that passenger conversations were just as costly to driving performance as cell phone ones.
> AAA ranks passengers as the third most reported cause of distraction-related accidents at 11 percent, compared to 1.5 percent for cellular telephones.
> A simulation study funded by the American Transportation Research Board concluded that driving events that require urgent responses may be influenced by in-vehicle conversations, and that there is little practical evidence that passengers adjusted their conversations to changes in the traffic.
The AAA reference is from 2001, and the document it links to is gone. Archive.org link: https://web.archive.org/web/20061020134705/http://www.aaapub...
Haven't seen any actual numbers yet, but the 'human conversation' thing - 11% - how many of those involved children in the back seats distracting the driver?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12...
For example, what the meta-analysis paper actually says is:
"From our analyses, in-vehicle (passenger) conversations were just as costly to driving performance as were remote (cell phone) conversations. This suggests that passengers, at least in those studies explored here, did not moderate their conversation in such a way as to alleviate the costs (as compared with remote conversers). These results must be interpreted with caution, however, given that relatively few studies directly examined the impact of passenger conversations."
If you look at their table of the original research they are working from, you can clearly see why they included that cautionary note.
Alternatively, a few minutes with Google Scholar will get you numerous primary sources that show a clear distinction between the effects of remote conversation and the effects of passenger interaction. Some studies suggest that passengers who don't moderate their conversation still have a negative effect, but hardly anyone has data that implies an effect as bad as cell phone conversations. Other studies found evidence that passengers can also be a benefit, for example warning an insufficiently attentive driver of a hazard they had failed to recognise themselves.
There is unfortunately not very much research into more specific conditions when passengers may prove to be a particularly serious distraction. For example, we know that young and inexperienced drivers are disproportionately likely to have accidents, but we don't yet know for sure whether passengers of a similar age are disproportionately likely to be a significant distraction. There is some evidence to suggest that this is at least a plausible theory, and in some places young and inexperienced drivers are now limited in the passengers they can take when they first start driving unsupervised.
When I do it to my mother she gets cross and starts talking even more, which is even more distracting. There is no good way out of this situation I am afraid. Some people have absolutely no situational awareness and are actively distracting as passengers.
nope, it doesn't happen in real life.
I have been in far more close calls as a result of being distracted by my passengers than by my cell phone.
When I was a kid and my dad was driving and had to make a left turn or perform some other maneuver that required his full attention, he'd ask everyone in the car to be quiet. This was a man that raced automobiles as a hobby and worked in professional racing at the highest levels his entire life.
Of course, I do realize that there are accidents caused by texting/emailing and driving at the same time, and as such, I do think it should be banned everywhere. When you're driving, your one and only concern should be what's going on around your vehicle.
Should we ban talking to your passengers in your car too? Perhaps. While we're at it, could we also ban our kids from fighting in the back seat and bothering us with "Daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy! Can I have a cookie?" Would such a ban be realistic? No, of course it wouldn't. If you could, would it significantly reduce the number of accidents on our roads? If my own experience is anything to go by, it most certainly would.
All we can do is assess crash statistics, ban those activities that can reasonably be banned where it would reduce in a reduction in those statistics.
Is it reasonable to ban the use of cell phones and all forms of mobile communication while driving? Absolutely. We used to drive all the time without phones in the car. We used to leave our houses without the ability to communicate at all until we got back to a land line. I think in extenuating circumstances, it can be overlooked, but if the statistics show that mobile device usage behind the wheel of a car results in accidents, we can easily go back to not using them when we're behind the wheel of the car. Will we? I'd say it's unlikely given the number of drivers I passed this morning, still holding their cell phones to their ears - despite this behaviour being banned in this province since 2010, with fines as heavy as $1,000 and 3 demerit points.
It's easy to say "You know what the most distracting thing is...?" but honestly, you can't remove all distracting things. All you can do is remove as many of them as you can reasonably remove and do your best to mitigate the risk of the remainder.
I do think that having my nav and my speedometer on the HUD would be far better though.
So, hits?
> we should ban talking to your passengers on a car too, right
That genie is already out of the bottle and would be impractical to implement. In any case it far less distracting talking to a passenger than trying to reply to a text or conducting what may be a serious conversation on a phone. Additionally the passenger can shut up instantly if (s)he sees a situation developing or even help bring your attention to it.
> both having a conversation and listening to music keep me alert when driving
On a long, boring trip, with very little to concentrate on, it can make sense to have the radio playing and someone talking to you. However on a rainy evening, in fast moving traffic, that same radio and passenger could get you killed and others with you. It is easy to turn off and ignore the radio and to ask your passenger, who can see the danger to please keep quiet for a while. It is a lot more difficult to ignore your phone when expecting that important call under these conditions.
> far the most distracting thing to me while driving? Constantly checking my speedometer
Seriously? Glancing at your speedometer is more distracting than a phone? Besides, glancing at your speedometer for a second carries far less risk than answering a text and having a fight with your girlfriend on the phone.
If they know what to look for. Doesn't work with children, people who don't drive themselves so they have no idea what to look out for, or even worse, it can work the other way around, when someone yells "WATCH OUT" at the top of their lungs because they perceive danger, even though you were not in any(saying hi to all my elderly relatives here).
You may be on to something. You've seen the number of people out there who actually turn to face their passengers full on while driving, right?
Actually it's pretty odd. I don't look at the passenger when I'm driving, though of course we'll converse. Even at stop lights, I spend more time checking the light and my rear view mirror than I do looking at my passenger. My responsibility as a driver requires me to do so when I'm driving, whether it's slow, fast or stopped.
This makes a lot of people noticeably uncomfortable.
I've taken to actually turning my face slightly towards people periodically, while keeping eyes ahead -- just to avoid creating a sense of awkwardness.
Take your pick.
This whole "distracted driving" thing is horseshit. If the road is your PRIMARY focus than you can do all of the things I just mentioned and not die. It's really that easy.
You're not supposed to talk to bus drivers without good reason, and this is partially why.
Also, I don't know about you, but I don't have to think much about eating, compared to carrying on a conversation or reading.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-suffolk-19597446
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4788910.stm
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-22290619
Etc etc
[0] - http://www.ibtimes.com/texting-drivers-take-eyes-road-5-seco...
[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss021L0hWU4
A given driver on a given trip is well-shown to be more attentive to traffic and less disruptive if you deny them distractions. (conversation, radio, food, etc)
But it seems plausible that a lost driver is a special case and may be less attentive and more disruptive to traffic if you deny them a navigational aid.
Anecdotally that feels true, though I don't know if it's been studied specifically.
My gut tells me you'd need some kind of reflecting sheet stuck in the windshield or the light would just go through. My guess is the screen in Navdy is actually reflecting light polarized in a specific angle, but I could be completely wrong.
Also, it would be harder because windshields are not planar nor perpendicular to the light source, which distorts the projected image. You'd have to calibrate it constantly, I guess that's why Navdy has a screen.
There's also the law. I believe you can't stick things to the windshield for safety reasons, specially if they occlude light.
It seems the optics might not be that hard: a mini-projector, a mirror (though I don't know why you wouldn't just project the light directly) and somewhere to reflect the light.
It comes down to.. would I rather someone be sending a text while looking down at their phone. Or would I feel better about someone sending a text, a message that's being sent regardless, while looking ahead in front of them.
Thanks for the laugh :-)!
This was my first thought as well. I saw a Mercedes the other day with the "lane change assist."
Rather hilariously: I was behind the Mercedes at a right turn, and you could see the "danger" light in her mirror indicating that my little sedan was in the blindspot of her enormous GLK.
(Ironically the tech itself was a distraction _to me_ because I was trying to figure out where the sensor package was, and how sensitive the instrumentation was. I had never seen it that closely before -- perhaps I should go to a Mercedes dealership.)
I want that sort of tech on every glass surface of the car. Anywhere I can see a vehicle: I should be able to see "potential hazard information."
Another one here: https://www.navdy.com/assets/directions-491e1e1af7ef47c676ab...
Having driven HUD cars on several 800+ mls roadtrips, i prefer BMW one the most. Camaro (2012 model) was so distracting, i had to turn it off due to glare at night.
BMW HUD is truly useful, but youre NOT TRULY looking at the road while looking at it - your eyes are focusing on a point in road that's only about 50 feet from you. Granted that's better than your lap where the cell phone is, its still not enough time to react to something happening in front at highway speeds - so as many have said, bringing texts/full voice interaction to this thing strikes me as dubious.
Also, wouldn't cops consider it to be a windshield obstruction? Its a giant box on top of the instrument cluster... many petite members of our society barely clear the steering wheel with their eyes...
PS: After about a week with a HUD you'll have a hard time going back to a car without one, but i don't ever see how this would be safe for anything except GPS.
Lastly, MSRP looks to be ~$450 - which is not far from integrated navi system (with which you get proper Bluetooth, traffic, no data plan requirements, and so on).
i know i will only be able to control minimal navigation and calls options.
no other app will ever play along. e.g. you skype calls will either block everything or only show up on your phone screen... to the point integration is so bad you still have your phone on the holder next to that screen and in the end you are using your phone directly more than that projector.
Why can't I just have a list of "high priority apps" and "low priority apps", or even just "highest priority" and "everything else."
It's not something an app can solve; but I personally spend a long time trying to ensure that my phone is safe to use as a navigational aid. Currently this usually includes voiding my warranty (to root, jailbreak, etc.) so that I can bypass the stock dialer. -- That just feels _wrong_ to me. I should not be voiding my warranty to make a device safer.
Navdy's interface looks quite a bit nicer though, for sure.
Why can't it read the message back to me? That would give me a rough idea of whether Siri got it right?
"Your message to PERSON says SIRI-MANGLED-MESSAGE. Would you like to send it?"
You can send or change it by voice.