Noah Bloom


Navigation Menu

The state of in-car UX: it’s getting worse, and more technology is not the fix

Posted by on Apr 20, 2014 in Cars, Future, Rants | 0 comments

Geoff Teehan of Toronto’s exquisite design firm Teehan+Lax recently posted on “The State of In-Car UX.”

It’s wonderfully visual and a worthwhile read, but still if you want a tldr: Teehan argues that no matter the price or the brand, the interfaces that adorn today’s vehicles are in a bad place. And they’re getting worse. Thankfully, there’s hope. Hope coming from Apple and Google.

Remember this? 1995 Nissan Pathfinder with aftermarket stereo:

Nissan Pathfinder

1995 Nissan Pathfinder

Now, for $845,000 in the otherwise luscious Porsche 918 Spyder, you get this. Really?

Big and obtrusive and distracting.

Big and obtrusive and distracting.

Is this really the UI people are raving about in the Tesla Model S?

Tesla S: still too much going on visually

Tesla S: still too much going on visually

Pretty galling especially to see Lambo and Ferrari electronics UI.

And in a $1.5M Lamborghini Reventon — what does it all mean? And that it often gets worse as the car gets more expensive.

Lamborghini Reventon -- what does it all mean?

Lamborghini Reventon — what does it all mean?

Jalopnik chimed in this week in “This Is The Worst New Trend In Car Interior Design

While touring the cars on display at the New York Auto Show, I was struck by how many of them get the integration of a screen into the dash right and how many of them get it wrong. If the screen is going to be a part of the car, shouldn’t it be integrated seamlessly into the design of the dash, rather than plastered on like a cheap Garmin you bought at Walmart?

An afterthought design earsore?

An afterthought design earsore?

The argument here is that: it’s only getting worse. The bright effort to slide your (familiar, better designed, fully functioning) iPad Mini onto the dash never seemed to have too much uptake. Car companies don’t hire or use people who design software for a living to conceive of and build the UX. Stereos, climate control, etc are designed either by industrial designers, car designers, or Human Machine Interface, which is what the car industry calls the people who deal with knobs and dials.

What’s next? Teehan harks on the arrival of Google and Apple CarPlay. Apparently, these software plus hardware giants are the panacea. And their placement of the buttons on the touch screens will solve our woes. While it seems reassuring at first, this is really no improvement.

I actually think this upcoming entrance of better software (via Google and Apple) into car UX is only a temporary stop-gap. In 10-15 years, cars (nicer cars) will (should) have super simple and many less controls. Like how Audi puts climate controls directly on the vents.

Control built into function

Audi: Control built into function

Your interactions will be all via voice and basic Head-up Display. HUDWAY reflects a simple UI from your phone onto the windshield. Here’s your inspiration:


Clean HUD concept from HUDWAY

So, without all the clutter of current software offerings, the (better car) interiors will be back to classic, no frills looks — like my dream Porsche 356, beautifully simple and minimalist:

Porsche 356

Porsche 356 cockpit; beautifully simple and minimalist

Summary: it’s easy to get caught up software-ifying the world and everything. Sometimes, especially when doing dangerous things like driving, the less interaction and the less design the better. The solution is not the smart and brash Apple and Google swooping in to fix the issue. The solution is voice-activated control, and maybe even HUD (Head-up Display) for navigation, and focusing on the driving part. At least until we’re all in driverless cars — 25 years away?

Dan Reitman chimes in with this great rant:

Colin Chapman, founder of Lotus cars, famously said “Simplify, then add lightness.” Of course, he probably didn’t consider Moore’s law, nor The Law Of 7-11 (Thine steed shall contain a cup-holder big enough to hold a Big Gulp). Cars would invariably get heavier and more complicated. This did not make for a better, safer driver – which should be the priority – nor does what Teehan is proposing.

He talks a lot about design purity and aesthetic beauty. He is an expert. Unless I missed it, he doesn’t, however, talk about ergonomics – and I wonder if he knows anything about them. To wit: how is a more pleasing font in a Porsche 918 infotainment screen going to improve my lap time or keep me from making sweet, violent, carbon-fibre love to a telephone pole at 100mph?

When I’m barrelling down the highway, I give precisely zero fucks about the fonts on my stereo screen. I care about how well I can feel around for the A/C controls (3 physical dials FTW, touchscreen = FAIL) or the volume knob, and where the flappy paddles are.

Teehan may like cars, but I bet you he’s just like the rest of the world’s distracted drivers: clogging the left lane while fiddling with his smartphone. The fact that he thinks any kind of swipe gesture is a remotely sound ergonomic choice for a car hammers this home.

This leads to a bigger issue about how we use our cars. I get that driving habits are, of course, a regional thing. I was just in LA for a couple of days and was reminded how bad the traffic was there – Jeff, i am guessing the Bay Area is just as bad. California is also, of course, a massive car market. If i lived in those places and had a commute that regularly involved me stuck in crawling traffic, I would likely be interested in things like in-car internet and other infotainment options that were optimized – both aesthetically and functionally – for my use, as Teehan describes.

The other side of the coin is those who believe that driving, whether on the Autobahn or in a gridlock traffic, is an activity that should involve minimal distraction and interference from other pursuits. Drivers should be focused on moving as quickly and safely as possible (and stay the out of the left lane) until they reach their destination, at which point they can start surfing the web or doing whatever else they need to do. Drivers in Europe seem to have this one figured out pretty well.

TL; DR – Teehan is barking up the wrong tree, IMHO. He’s pushing for improving in-car UX as it applies to infotainment – but the car is not yet an appliance; those things are secondary, and if they aren’t treated as such, we’re just going to have more distracted drivers who are a nuisance and hazard on public roads. Build me an interior that focuses on driver alertness, safety, and comfort – in that order – and worry about turning your car into a Bang & Olufsen or Apple showroom when the thing is parked.

Less and smarter technology, more voice activated features. Less distraction, more safe driving. Less buttons, more classic clean design. What are your favourite car interiors free of design clutter?

Read More

Time to panic Canada. In 32 days, your fate #Quebec2014

Posted by on Mar 6, 2014 in Canada | 0 comments

Just 18 months since gaining a minority leadership, Quebec’s separatist premier Pauline Marois has called a snap election within 33 days. Tick tock. From today, 32 days to go.

Let’s not be vague about this.

If you live in Quebec, please don’t even think about missing this vote. Here are two reasons, for example, not to vote for Marois’ Parti Québécois government:

1) Their secular charter: a proposed law that would ban the wearing of overt religious symbols by any government employee or by workers at institutions. Really?

2) Separatism. This might have been fathomable 20+ years ago, but now Quebec is far from Canada’s economic engine. Today, Alberta is in the driver’s seat, as Quebec dawdles with its bloated welfare, dysfunctional infrastructure programs, impotent energy resource development, and absurd language laws repelling investors. More below.

Actually, no matter for whom you vote, don’t miss this one.

If you can’t vote in Quebec, but are Canadian, let’s consider separatism again:

1) PQ wins majority = likely. They are ahead in the polls. Also, the opposition’s new leader, Philippe Couillard, is generally seen as a weak leader, even by some of his own Liberal party members.

2) PQ calls a referendum to secede from Canada = likely

3) Referendum squeaks by and passes by 50%+1 = likely

4) Quebec secedes from Canada = likely

5) Canada cannot withstand a truncated geography and crumbles = likely

6) No more Canada, one of this past century’s greatest nations

I’m no political scientist. I don’t even live in Quebec anymore. There’s a lot about this election that I don’t understand. But here are two things everyone should be doing for 32 days:

1) Vote if you can

2) Visibly show your love for Canada and Quebec

I love Montreal and Quebec and Canada. Thanks. Please panic now and do your part.

Read More

Wins and losses from #sochi2014 and lessons for future Olympic Games

Posted by on Feb 26, 2014 in Lessons, Rants, Sports | 0 comments

I continue my love – hate with the Olympics. The Games in Sochi just came to a close, and while they were full of horrifying politics, pathetic media coverage, and IOC bureaucracy, they were also full of incredible human triumphs through sport, by these incredible athletes.

The world, connectivity, and significance of these athletes as role models are changing quickly, so I’m hoping those who are part of crafting such an important amateur sports event will consider how to stay relevant in the Games to come. My thoughts on the winners and losers and lessons:


LOSER: Big media for spoiling the results. News, apps, scrollers, and TV felt they had to be the first to announce winners (and disappointments of course), and considering the time change from Sochi to North America, didn’t seem to care that some people sometimes enjoy watching sport without knowing the outcome. Consider that many events were broadcast time-delayed, this was so painful. even titled their online videos with the result.

WINNER: CBC for broadcasting on-demand streams (often live) of all of the events, without titling the video with the outcome.


LOSER: Judged sports. There were no loss of controversy over who won and who didn’t in judged sports, from freestyle skiing to, worse, figure skating. There was no shortage of fuming about Russia’s own Adelina Sotnikova “stealing” the gold from favourite and defending Olympic champ Yuna Kim of South Korea. Lesson: if you can’t stand the uncertainty of judged sports, don’t play them; enter a race. Otherwise, realize how part of your fate is decided by other people’s opinions, tastes, and maybe even wallets.

Sotnikova Kim

WINNER: Snowboarders who put into perspective the realities of judged sports, like bronze medal, easy-going, Canadian snowboarder Mark McMorris, “but it’s a judged sport, what can you do?

It’s easy when you’re the gold medalist to be the one to put it in perspective, but you gotta love Sage Kotsenburg’s interview on Conan:


LOSER: NBC focusing on American athletes only during coverage. They would often skip an A Final in favour of showing the B Final with the American, or only report on the America’s result, not even the medalists.

WINNER: NBC improving by doing some great profiles on international star athletes, nearly making them heroes to Americans. NHL Revealed will even broadcast “NHL Revealed has two-hour behind the scenes special on Olympic hockey tonight” — I hope for Rio 2016, media with access could do the same for other sports, and build up personalities, history, and rivalries weeks maybe before the events take place. I can only think this would bolster their viewing interest.


LOSER: Russia and its $50B wasted. The glorification of the Putin Games did manage to gloss over the travesties of lack of human rights, burning Ukraine, and corrupt $50B spending during the Games. Media became pretty quiet on calling Russia and Putin out.

WINNER: Safety of athletes and fans. It’s almost hard to believe with all that friction and animosity, that no tragic incident took place in Sochi. Amen.


LOSER: Legacy of the Games. The new world-class facilities built for the Games will likely be wasted, or shut down, or moved, and will likely not help future athletes in their pursuit of excellence. Shame.

WINNER: Conan’s “Sochi’s PR Rep Says Everything Is Going Great”


LOSER: Too much figure skating on TV. And their ridiculously over-thought and over-sparkly outfits and haircut strategies. Is TV changing their approach to the viewing demographic? Do women watch TV and men watch streaming video online?

WINNER: Hero athletes, i.e. cross country skiing heroes. These incredible men and women push themselves so hard, right to the finish line, to their absolute limit, and cannot even stand after crossing the line. True heroes for grit and determination. Wow.



LOSER: NBC presenting their coverage as if it’s reality TV! Great read from Slate: “Why You Hate NBC’s Olympics Coverage: It’s reality TV masquerading as a sporting event.”

WINNER: The real, often overlooking stories of the athletes. I was watching the men’s slalom, and way, way back in the results and start list was this guy: Hubertus von hohenlohe, the one man Mexican Olympic team. He is also… a German prince, 55 years old, a world-class photographer, a professional musician, fluent in five languages, and an heir to an automobile fortune. And participating in his fifth Olympics. Despite his fortunate upbringing, he is valiantly trying to bring attention in Mexico to Olympic sport. In his mariachi suit, however, he was struggling, 17 seconds back of the winner. (NBC video)



WINNER: Bringing back Canadian former Olympians as commentators: Jenn Heil, Ashleigh McIvor, Adam van Koeverden, Kelly VanderBeek, Clara Hughes, Beckie Scott, Kristina Groves, Jennifer Botterill, Kerrin Lee-Gartner, etc. Nearly every event had a former great in the second seat calling it for TV. This was incredible not just giving an insider look, or even appropriately lionizing our Canadian heroes, but also giving them exposure to this world and a potential for some future work in media, for people who had dedicated so much, and often had to neglect their career in the past to pursue that level of sport.

WINNER: Canadians acting like champions. Canada had no reason to apologize and confirm to our “I’m Sorry” stereotype. They crushed it. Nice job.


Read More

3 things everyone needs to do better

Posted by on Aug 23, 2013 in Rants | 0 comments

Come on. It’s 2013. Learn to deal with the world and people around you.

1) How to take a decent photo. Step one: aim. Is your subject in the frame? Have you looked at your four edges that they don’t cut off their feet or head? Do you have a big massive space of nothing for no good reason? Move with your legs to a better spot, and fix it. Step two: on a camera, press the shutter halfway, let the camera focus, then when you’re ready press the rest of the way. No more shutter jabs! On a touchscreen / mobile phone, press and hold the shutter, and when it’s good, release to shoot. Step three: only use zoom if moving the position of your camera doesn’t do what you want. I mean use your legs and walk. Zoom doesn’t just move you closer, it’s changes a lot more. Save that lesson for later.

Bad Photography Example 6

2) Grammar. There is no excuse to confuse “it’s” and “its” or “there” and “their” and “they’re” or “your” and “you’re.” Take 5 minutes, and teach yourself.

3) Don’t get on an elevator if people are still getting off.

Now we’ll all get along. Thanks for reading.

Read More

The contentious Bill O’Reilly with sound life advice

Posted by on Aug 23, 2013 in Lessons | 0 comments

“You don’t rely on anybody. You make your way. And you’re gonna get slapped down. And that’s okay. You get back up. Sometimes you’re gonna succeed, sometimes you’re gonna fail. But somebody pays you a wage — you go in, you do the best job you can, and you take your pay home. You don’t like the job, you get another job. But that’s what I want people to be: I want them to use their talent to be self-reliant, to be honest, to give to charity, to be fair — all of those things.” -Bill O’Reilly on Q with Jian Ghomeshi

Read More

Jiber ● Blog: The Next Facebook: The House Party

Posted by on May 22, 2013 in Tumblr | 0 comments

Reblogged from my Tumblr page. Check the original post here.

Jiber ● Blog: The Next Facebook: The House Party:


Isn’t the Internet so much more than just a place to hang out with friends? Many of us grew up on the Internet using services like forums (BBS, IRC) and interacting with strangers. Now, it seems, so much of our online socializing is with our real-world friends, our contact list, our existing social graph. Wouldn’t it seem more appropriate to use the Internet for the exciting powers and connectivity it enables?

Read More

The Google Glass era has begun. Will it last?

Posted by on Apr 28, 2013 in Future, Tech | 0 comments

The first public Google Glass povsmartjewelries have shipped. It’s drumming up some real emotion about the social appropriateness of it being pervasive and mainstream. The issue is that it’s not just about the one wearing Glass — for him or her, it’s pure usefulness, once they get past the self-consciousness of their current awkward appearance — it’s about everyone else being always watched, from up close, from the point of view of a person with whom you’re interacting. Are we ready for this? Does it forever cross our comfort line, or will that, like so many other conventions during the Internet, mobile, and social era, slowly push that comfort line further?

We just don’t know; it’s great technology, but perhaps it’s not everyday technology.

What is he looking at exactly?

Some preliminary early product thoughts:

Robert Scoble:

I will never live a day of my life from now on without it (or a competitor). It’s that significant… The success of this totally depends on price. Each audience I asked at the end of my presentations “who would buy this?” As the price got down to $200 literally every hand went up… Most of the privacy concerns I had before coming to Germany just didn’t show up.”

Drew Olanoff:

Some will see this device as a fad, something that isn’t really “necessary” in today’s world, and others will see this as the beginning of an adventure for users, developers and Google, of course. I tend to lean towards the adventure side, as it’s not fully known what impact Glass will have on society, your day-to-day activities, or the future of technology and hardware.”

None other than Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt actually said:

Talking out loud to control the Google Glasses via voice recognition is “the weirdest thing… There are obviously places where Google Glasses are inappropriate”

Some of the best behavioural insights come from Jan Chipchase, Executive Creative Director of Global Insights at frog:

His article You Lookin’ at Me? Reflections on Google Glass is a heavier read about the implications of wearing Glass in public. It makes us think more about how Glass may break the unwritten rules that govern socially appropriate behaviour.

It brings up the famous Milgram subway social psychology study from almost 40 years ago: “But Dr. Milgram was interested in exploring the web of unwritten rules that govern behavior underground, including the universally understood and seldom challenged first-come-first-served equity of subway seating.” It was a rare study on the delicate subway order.

“Milgram’s idea exposed the extremely strong emotions that lie beneath the surface,” he said. “You have all these strangers together. That study showed how much the rules are saving us from chaos.”

From Jan Chipchase’s previous research while at Nokia about actors wearing a Glass-like product in Tokyo:

[During experiments about social/tech interactions], our actors and actresses felt extremely self-conscious about wearing nonstandard glasses, and awkward about acting out the scenarios, particularly in contexts where there were others in close proximity. A number of the things we learned from this study surprised us.

What will induce an odd response to usage of Google Glass or other tech device interactions in the future?

Glass has four design principles for developers that focus on the Glass wearer’s user experience: “design for Glass,” “don’t get in the way,” “keep it timely,” and “avoid the unexpected.”
Two complementary principles will go some way toward accommodating the concerns of people in proximity and lower social barriers to adoption:
Proximate Transparency: Allow anyone in proximity to access the same feed that the wearer is recording or seeing and view it through a device of their choosing.
Remote Control: allow identifiable people in proximity to control Glass’s recording functionality and have access to the output of what was recorded.

What a great way to consider how we might accomodate the privacy concerns of people nearby: let Glass usage be transparent and let people collaborate on its created content.

One could argue that the form taken by Glass offers up a lazy futurist’s vision of what might be Glass has a certain inevitability about it.
In due course, the technologies to deliver Glass’s emerging functionality will truly disappear from view — this is a window of opportunity for discussion, debate and a reflection.

Final thoughts:

Yes, we are always being watched, but we’re starting to accept it. There can be value in that, like the surveillance coverage and user generated visuals around the Boston Marathon bombing. That led to a citizen-led detective hunt for the suspects, and you may disagree with how that happened, but isn’t it incredible that we live in that sort of era.

We’re still grappling with our individual privacy in a social-world-gone-online, which is only a fabrication of the last 9-12 years! Remember when we banned cameraphones from locker rooms? The discomfort was recognized, reasonable guidelines went up, and social norms were easily swayed. What happens when Glass of the future will be hidden and covert: people will have it, and there’s nothing anyone else can do, and that’s why we should be worried.

Even now, the product is not fully recognized in the real world, which is why Robert Scoble doesn’t get much backlash about wearing it all the time.

We ought to talk about this openly. Otherwise, could it be “too late”?

In the meantime, I’m bullish on shared experiences on mobile and their inevitable evolution to an always-in-view experience. In terms of people around us, that’s something like my company’s current iPhone app Jiber, and I’d love to hear your thoughts on all this.

Read More