this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2024
393 points (99.7% liked)

Europe

8324 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

More options are always the optimal solution for the consumer, though in this particular case I'd say they don't necessarily need to have exactly one physical button and one touch screen button for each thing. Mostly just the things that a driver is most likely to toggle on the road.

It's not unusual for cars to have a couple different ways to control things. Like how the volume control on the sound system can be on the dash but also behind the steering wheel.

But again, doubles of every single function is probably overkill.

[โ€“] grue@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

More options are always the optimal solution for the consumer

No, that's not true. Too much choice creates decision fatigue and can be exploited to create a confusopoly.

You do need enough options to ensure a competitive market, but beyond that, at some point the marginal utility of adding another option ad infinitum becomes negative.

[โ€“] BakerBagel@midwest.social 4 points 5 months ago

Having doubles of the controls is a terrible idea. It's more expensive, unnecessary, and a failure point. Why put a command tree for the climate control in the infotainment control if there is a knob next to the screen?