From The Verge:
This is why everyone hates in-car navigation systemsQuoteSubaru recently posted a YouTube video touting Starlink, the company's in-house navigation and entertainment system. You'd think they'd make it look good; companies are typically in the business of making their products seem like pure, unfiltered magic. Not Subaru, which is apparently content to let its in-dash electronics trainwreck over the course of one minute, 43 seconds.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (http://markholtz.info/15j)
Oh man, I can see it in the actor's face even. He's gamely trying to do his job, but I can picture all the outtakes:
Director: "OK, now just scroll it over to the left."
Actor: "OK...wait, hang on...oops, went too far, now back...agh! Dammit, I zoomed out by mistake! Sorry Joel, lemme just try it from the top again."
Something to be said for good-old-fashioned paper road maps!
No worse than the new Goog interface.
We can't bash all in-car systems based on one video from Subaru. I've used plenty of in-car nav systems, and some are very good. Audi and BMW, for example, make very good in-car dashboard systems, and both are fairly intuitive and easy to use. Hyundai, Kia, and Toyota all have fairly basic nav systems, but they are very quick and snappy, which more or less makes up for their lack of features (the Germans have the best of both worlds, with the fastest processors and the most amount of features).
If I was in charge of buying a Subie, it would be the BRZ with a manual transmission. I don't care if it comes with a nav or not, but as far as I'm concerned, it's added weight and I could use my phone with Google Maps.
EDIT: I want to add that I'm not overly excited about CarPlay and Android Auto. I've used both, and both are more or less ruined by the shit third-party hardware that they ship with (so, for example, CarPlay on the Subaru is probably shit because Fuji probably didn't pack enough processing power into the head unit -- I've seen both demoed on Korean hardware with pretty good success).
Another problem: People will be looking at the map screen and not the road.
Quote from: 1 on February 10, 2015, 05:17:53 PM
Another problem: People will be looking at the map screen and not the road.
Brian Cooley, from CNET, has been a proponent of faster processors for a long time for this very reason...the longer you are staring at a slow nav system, the less time you're looking at the road.
I don't hate my in-car navigation system although I think mine is superior to the one advertised here.
Why? No bloatware. It's just a map and a navigation system. No features that demand a monthly subscription and cease working if you don't have one. No "app" where you can search for all the restaurants and hotels that paid Subaru money to recommend them.
What I do find silly about the system I have, though, is that it refuses to let you enter addresses while the car is moving, and if you're in the middle of entering an address when you start moving it kicks you out and displays a message saying "unavailable while driving. Pay attention to traffic". Thank you, nanny GPS system, for not letting the passenger in my car use you while I'm driving. :eyebrow:
... and that is why I will stick with my freestanding GPS and its beanbag holder.
I have no frills GPS and it does its job just fine. I don't understand the need for anything more.
I use Google Maps on my phone. Didn't spend a dime extra for something I need on rare occasion.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 11, 2015, 08:04:55 AM
I use Google Maps on my phone. Didn't spend a dime extra for something I need on rare occasion.
Same here. Plus I enjoy just figuring it out when I have the luxury to do so.
I prefer the GPS on my phone. However, some of the roads I drive on for leisure driving (CA-70, CA-89, CA-4) are in less-traveled parts where is simply not economically feasible to have a cell phone tower. That's when it's nice to have that offline GPS unit.
But, in-car navigation system? No thanks. Please integrate with my cell phone.