Warning, this is a rant. I hate that they got rid of basic voice commands

[2kwik4u]

And that is rather the point of my original comment. We can dislike Rivian taking functionality away while also recognizing that, whether we noticed it or not, we bought into an ecosystem whose terms reserve them a considerable amount of latitude to do exactly that.

I find it interesting how many people only like the "software defined vehicle" when features are added, but then immediately get upset when they are removed. Like, this is what you signed up for in a very "for better or worse" kind of way. You agreed to let someone other than yourself have control over the definition of your vehicle.

Good deep dive on the terms BTW!

Sponsored

 

[shadow_tek001]

Well you should start a class action lawsuit then, rake them over the coals!!

If only that were feasible. But they're "fine print protected"

And the OP, aside from having an issue with the changes, might be looking for more clicks on the content.

Not at all... Yes I like the clicks, but this genuinely pissed me off, and I want rivian to know about it. I even shared it with their customer support.

 

[shadow_tek001]

Yea, ya kinda did. In a video no less. I highlighted the captions for clarity.

I'll accept that. Though, I did say it during a rather hot headed moment. I was pissed off, so I exaggerated a bit. Though I still think it's more unsafe then it was. But the context of my reply, was referring to what I had said here on the forum, not in the video itself. But I accept it regardless.

 

[shadow_tek001]

I find it interesting how many people only like the "software defined vehicle" when features are added, but then immediately get upset when they are removed. Like, this is what you signed up for in a very "for better or worse" kind of way. You agreed to let someone other than yourself have control over the definition of your vehicle.

Good deep dive on the terms BTW!

No, that's not what this is..... I couldn't care less if they took away voice control completely to be frank. My issue is with the fact that now I need to stare at the screen while driving to perform functions that were easier before. For example, If they removed voice control, and at the same time added some physical buttons magically to the dashboard, I'd be happy and perfectly ok with that.
So many commenters seem to think I'm upset about losing "alexa" or "voice commands" - Sure that sux, but what I'm really upset about, is the diminishment of safety as a direct result - that's literally it.

Imagine, if Rivian determined that the turn signal stalk was a fire hazard, so they recalled all rivians, and just removed the stalk in favour of new buttons on the screen... How would you feel about that? ... To me, this is basically that, to a lesser extreme, but still stupid IMO

 

[2kwik4u]

I'll accept that. Though, I did say it during a rather hot headed moment. I was pissed off, so I exaggerated a bit. Though I still think it's more unsafe then it was. But the context of my reply, was referring to what I had said here on the forum, not in the video itself. But I accept it regardless.

Appreciate and respect the ownership.

 

[2kwik4u]

No, that's not what this is..... I couldn't care less if they took away voice control completely to be frank. My issue is with the fact that now I need to stare at the screen while driving to perform functions that were easier before. For example, If they removed voice control, and at the same time added some physical buttons magically to the dashboard, I'd be happy and perfectly ok with that.
So many commenters seem to think I'm upset about losing "alexa" or "voice commands" - Sure that sux, but what I'm really upset about, is the diminishment of safety as a direct result - that's literally it.

Imagine, if Rivian determined that the turn signal stalk was a fire hazard, so they recalled all rivians, and just removed the stalk in favour of new buttons on the screen... How would you feel about that? ... To me, this is basically that, to a lesser extreme, but still stupid IMO

You're speaking in hyperbole around safety here on purpose, because you're mad at feature loss.

Did you buy the truck with the express understanding that you hated touchscreens, but made a concession on having voice commands? Did you test drive one at all before purchase?

This feels really strongly like making a mountain out of a mole hill. Aside from MAYBE (and that's a big maybe) the defrost setting, there isn't anything controlled through the screen that is safety related. Go/Stop/Turn/Signal are all physical controls, in logical locations. If you think that adjusting the HVAC, radio, navigation, chassis, or other secondary settings is safety critical than you are speaking in hyperbole. ALL of that, every single other thing in the screen, can wait until you're in a safe position to either be distracted by it slightly, or stop and make an adjustment. If you want to be safe, then be safe, full stop.

Beyond that.......screens are no less safe than buttons. I've been driving for over 30 years, and I can't remember a situation where I didn't look where my hand was going before I moved it there. HVAC, Radio, all of that, typically gets a glance as I'm moving my hand towards the control. That's fairly common human nature, and aside from a few controls that are used exceptionally often (which are also physical controls in the Rivian) like volume adjustment, you're looking anyway. Beyond that, the premise of muscle memory that everyone keeps touting as the reason you wouldn't have to is flawed. It's muscle memory, not "button location" memory. The HVAC controls for instance are always in the same place when you click them. You're muscles remember the location regardless of if the end result is a screen press or a button click. If you've lived with the truck this long, you know that it's not that big of a deal to adjust the HVAC temp, radio station, or chassis setting while driving. No more than any other vehicle built in the last 20yrs.

Adjusting crap through the screen is no more distracting or unsafe than adjusting crap through buttons. The time spent paying attention to something other than driving is relatively the same. People have been crashing while messing with the radio when they shouldn't have for decades, it's not any different because we touch a screen instead of click a button. The underlying distraction remains, and human nature to not pay attention while driving hasn't changed either.

 

[Alan in Tempe]

Adjusting crap through the screen is no more distracting or unsafe than adjusting crap through buttons. The time spent paying attention to something other than driving is relatively the same.

Navigating screen touch points that can't be identified by touch does in fact take more eye time to execute than physical buttons or knobs. Saying "no more distracting" is hyperbole. Perhaps nearly insignificantly more distracting could be argued, but "no more distracting or unsafe" is ignoring reality. It is the difference between a glance to get your fingers in position, and a matter of seconds, oftentimes more when needing to drive down layers of changing touch options.

 

[2kwik4u]

Navigating screen touch points that can't be identified by touch does in fact take more eye time to execute than physical buttons or knobs. Saying "no more distracting" is hyperbole. Perhaps nearly insignificantly more distracting could be argued, but "no more distracting or unsafe" is ignoring reality. It is the difference between a glance to get your fingers in position, and a matter of seconds, oftentimes more when needing to drive down layers of changing touch options.

Disagree. The difference in adjusting is minimal and within any statistically significant margin of error when compared with physical buttons. The underlying "messing with a setting" distraction is the problem, not the event at the end of the finger tip.

I'll change my wording to " 'practically' no more distracting or unsafe" if that sits better, but the premise stands, the interface isn't the problem, it's the base distraction that is.

 

[Alan in Tempe]

Disagree. The difference in adjusting is minimal and within any statistically significant margin of error when compared with physical buttons. The underlying "messing with a setting" distraction is the problem, not the event at the end of the finger tip.

I'll change my wording to " 'practically' no more distracting or unsafe" if that sits better, but the premise stands, the interface isn't the problem, it's the base distraction that is.

I just did a quick search on touch screen safety in autos and found dozens of referenced studies, nearly all agreeing that touch screens are significantly less safe, but are far more profitable for the manufacturers. Here is a study that compared a few basic steps for a driver, such as setting a radio station and adjusting the temperature, and timing the time to complete these steps in various autos such as the model 3 with touch screen and the V70 with many physical controls. There are many results, but a 10 second to complete these tasks in the V70 took 30, 40 and more seconds in cars with touch screens. While these are not safety critical actions, they are very commonly executed actions that do create longer distractions from driving, and that is a real negative impact on safety. Feel free to link to any non-car manufacturer sponsored study (to avoid profit bias) that shows otherwise, lest we are only arguing anecdotal opinion. https://www.themanual.com/auto/touchscreen-in-car-less-safe-than-buttons/

 

[shadow_tek001]

You're speaking in hyperbole around safety here on purpose, because you're mad at feature loss.

Did you buy the truck with the express understanding that you hated touchscreens, but made a concession on having voice commands? Did you test drive one at all before purchase?

This feels really strongly like making a mountain out of a mole hill. Aside from MAYBE (and that's a big maybe) the defrost setting, there isn't anything controlled through the screen that is safety related. Go/Stop/Turn/Signal are all physical controls, in logical locations. If you think that adjusting the HVAC, radio, navigation, chassis, or other secondary settings is safety critical than you are speaking in hyperbole. ALL of that, every single other thing in the screen, can wait until you're in a safe position to either be distracted by it slightly, or stop and make an adjustment. If you want to be safe, then be safe, full stop.

Beyond that.......screens are no less safe than buttons. I've been driving for over 30 years, and I can't remember a situation where I didn't look where my hand was going before I moved it there. HVAC, Radio, all of that, typically gets a glance as I'm moving my hand towards the control. That's fairly common human nature, and aside from a few controls that are used exceptionally often (which are also physical controls in the Rivian) like volume adjustment, you're looking anyway. Beyond that, the premise of muscle memory that everyone keeps touting as the reason you wouldn't have to is flawed. It's muscle memory, not "button location" memory. The HVAC controls for instance are always in the same place when you click them. You're muscles remember the location regardless of if the end result is a screen press or a button click. If you've lived with the truck this long, you know that it's not that big of a deal to adjust the HVAC temp, radio station, or chassis setting while driving. No more than any other vehicle built in the last 20yrs.

Adjusting crap through the screen is no more distracting or unsafe than adjusting crap through buttons. The time spent paying attention to something other than driving is relatively the same. People have been crashing while messing with the radio when they shouldn't have for decades, it's not any different because we touch a screen instead of click a button. The underlying distraction remains, and human nature to not pay attention while driving hasn't changed either.

I think you're arguing against a point I didn't make. I'm not saying every function on the screen is "safety critical," nor am I saying screens are inherently more dangerous than buttons (though, that could be argued). My point is that removing hands-free basic voice control makes some of those functions more distracting to operate while driving.

You're right that adjusting the HVAC, navigation, radio, etc. can wait until you're stopped. That's exactly why having voice control was useful: you didn't necessarily have to wait. You could keep your eyes on the road and hands on the wheel while making a simple adjustment.

And the muscle-memory argument actually reinforces my point. Yes, after owning the truck for a while, you know where things are. But knowing where something is on a touchscreen doesn't eliminate the need to visually confirm the screen and interact with a changing interface. A physical control gives you **tactile feedback** and can often be operated without looking. A voice command requires neither.

There's also an important distinction between "screens are no less safe than buttons" and "a touchscreen is no less distracting than voice control." Those aren't the same thing. The comparison isn't really touchscreen vs. button—it's touchscreen vs. hands-free voice command. But yeah, I personally would have been fine with buttons.

I also don't think "just wait until you're stopped" is a particularly compelling defense of removing a feature. By that logic, virtually every hands-free feature in a modern vehicle could be dismissed because the driver can simply pull over. The entire purpose of hands-free controls is to reduce the amount of attention diverted from driving.

And yes, I knew the truck had a touchscreen when I bought it. That's not really the issue. The issue is that Rivian subsequently removed a functionality that made interacting with that touchscreen less distracting. There's a meaningful difference between choosing a vehicle with a particular feature set and having the manufacturer remove part of that feature set after you've bought it.

I'm not claiming the truck suddenly became dangerously undrivable. I'm saying Rivian made a regression in driver usability and hands-free operation, and calling that out as a safety concern isn't "hyperbole." The magnitude of the safety impact is debatable; the fact that removing hands-free operation increases the need for visual/manual interaction isn't.

 

[Dark-Fx]

You should consider never driving again if you are so reliant on voice commands that them not working means you find driving to be unsafe.

 

[shadow_tek001]

You should consider never driving again if you are so reliant on voice commands that them not working means you find driving to be unsafe.

If that's what you got from this, then you weren't listening. Dude gimme a break

 

[Dark-Fx]

If that's what you got from this, then you weren't listening. Dude gimme a break

Lol. Don't click bait us then.

 

[csharp]

OP, I am sorry for your loss.
Reading this thread did give me a good chuckle this morning, so thank you to everyone. It is funny to me how absolutely divisive this topic was.
BTW I am on the side of: while it is annoying to take away voice control, I do not consider it to be an unsafe move. What about all of the vehicles out there with touch screens and no voice control, are they just ticking time bombs waiting for an accident to happen? While we, as Rivian drivers, are immune to it because we have (had?) voice control?

 

[shadow_tek001]

OP, I am sorry for your loss.
Reading this thread did give me a good chuckle this morning, so thank you to everyone. It is funny to me how absolutely divisive this topic was.
BTW I am on the side of: while it is annoying to take away voice control, I do not consider it to be an unsafe move. What about all of the vehicles out there with touch screens and no voice control, are they just ticking time bombs waiting for an accident to happen? While we, as Rivian drivers, are immune to it because we have (had?) voice control?

Can you provide an example of another vehicle that has touch screen buttons with no basic voice control?

Sponsored