As a long-time admirer of Audi, I deeply respect the company’s innovation and commitment to excellence. However, after testing the new Audi Q6 on 30 November 2024 in Germany, I encountered a feature that warrants serious reconsideration: the passenger display. To be candid, this is the most distracting feature I have ever experienced in any of the cars I have tested.
While the concept of a passenger display is intriguing, its execution in the Q6 presents significant challenges. The display’s large reflective surface is highly distracting for the driver, reflecting the surroundings and constantly catching attention. The human visual system, evolutionarily attuned to detect brightness changes in the periphery, is particularly sensitive to this effect. In practice, this means the display frequently diverts the driver’s eyes away from the road—posing a serious safety concern.
It’s surprising that this feature passed Audi’s internal safety evaluations and made it to production. Given its potential implications for driver safety, I wonder how regulatory bodies like NHTSA might assess it. This feature could potentially lead to a recall.
Interestingly, when I am critical of design decisions, people often suggest it’s due to cost-cutting. But in this case, Audi has clearly invested considerable resources to add something that negatively impacts both UX and safety.
With the best intentions, I propose the following suggestions to Audi:
-If the passenger display is an optional extra, consider immediately halting its availability until the issue is resolved.
-Explore the development of a hardware trim cover or other solutions to mitigate the reflection issue.
I want to emphasise that there are some truly innovative HMI features in the Q6, and the team has clearly worked hard to create a modern, cutting-edge system. However, for me, the passenger display issue overshadows everything else.
Audi has a well-earned reputation for safety and innovation, and I am confident they will address this issue thoughtfully. My hope is that this feedback can help ensure the Q6 meets the high standards that Audi drivers and enthusiasts expect.
A Unified Approach for EU Automakers: Standardising Vehicle Interfaces
The European automotive industry, historically the engine of Europe’s economy, now faces an urgent need to balance three central priorities: economic growth, environmental sustainability, and social responsibility. As competition from Asia and the US intensifies, the EU must act swiftly to preserve all three. Failing to find the right balance risks losing not just one, but all of these pillars, undermining the industry’s future in Europe.
1. This is Not the Time for Philosophy – It’s Time to Act
With factory closures and redundancies on the horizon if change doesn’t happen fast enough, waiting for legislation or guidelines is not an option. European OEMs must take the initiative and drive change now to stay competitive. Delaying action only increases vulnerability—this is the moment to commit, align, and make bold moves.
There are numerous areas where collaboration and standardisation can strengthen the industry, but I’d like to focus on my area of expertise: Human-Machine Interface (HMI).
2. Why Standardisation?
Cutting Costs and Improving Driver Familiarity Standardisation in HMI design offers immediate, tangible benefits:
Economies of Scale: Shared HMI interfaces simplify production, cutting costs and freeing up resources for high-impact innovations.
Driver Familiarity: Consistent layouts help drivers adapt quickly between vehicles, boosting safety and ease of use.
A Foundation for Brand-Specific Innovation: With shared HMI standards, automakers can focus on creating unique brand experiences at higher levels without re-engineering the basics.
3. Software is Hard – The Role of a Common Operating System
Developing proprietary operating systems is costly and complex, often leading to fragmented systems that complicate updates and add unnecessary overhead. While some OEMs, like VW and Mercedes, have pursued bespoke platforms, a unified platform like Android Automotive OS offers a more efficient solution.
This shared, flexible base supports brand-specific customisation without reinventing core elements. By using a common platform, manufacturers can build unique HMI features at the top layer, allowing them to innovate quickly and focus on delivering seamless, user-focused experiences.
4. Standardising Key HMI Physical Controls for Safety and Familiarity
Standardising physical HMI controls across the cabin enhances usability and safety, ensuring drivers can operate essential features intuitively and with minimal distraction. Here are some essential standardisation wins (already present in many OEMs):
Cruise Control / ADAS on the Left: Placing ADAS controls on the left side of the steering wheel .
Media Controls on the Right: Positioning media and volume controls on the right side.
Centrally Located Hazard Button (Y=0): A visible, centre-aligned hazard button ensures it’s easily accessible in emergencies, reducing response time and enhancing safety.
Gear Selector: Embracing Automatic as the Norm: With automatic transmissions now the preference for many drivers, establishing automatic as the standard—with manual as an optional extra—aligns with market trends, simplifies production, and creates a streamlined vehicle layout.
Physical Climate Controls: Stop playing Tesla’s or Chinese OEMs’ game, we want physical controls. Maintaining physical controls for essential climate functions, like temperature adjustment and fan speed, enhances usability, safety, and driver satisfaction. There’s a distinct satisfaction in operating a well-crafted physical control—the tactile feedback from a precision-engineered button or dial allows drivers to make adjustments quickly and confidently, without diverting attention to a touchscreen.
Note: Standardisation should focus on HMI layout and architecture rather than using identical components. Each OEM can maintain unique designs and brand identity while ensuring the same control positioning, layout, and intuitive functionality. This common architecture improves user familiarity and experience without restricting individual brand expression.
5. Driving the Future
Standardising HMI elements and adopting a shared platform provides European automakers with a practical, cost-effective foundation for innovation. Far from limiting creativity, a unified approach enables OEMs to build on a solid base, delivering distinctive brand experiences while ensuring safety and usability.
The recent Volvo-Daimler partnership to co-develop a software-defined platform for trucks is a prime example of how collaboration can drive industry-wide transformation. This joint effort illustrates the potential for EU automakers to work together, setting the stage for industry-leading progress and efficiency that all European manufacturers can benefit from.
This is the time to act decisively, take ownership, and drive change across the industry—before external forces or regulations leave us with fewer options and threaten the very foundations of Europe’s automotive strength.
The Importance of HMI Strategy: Decisions That Stick for Years
When it comes to HMI design in vehicles, the decisions made today will stay with the product for a long time—typically at least four years. Poor choices in HMI don’t just affect production costs or company reputation; they have a direct, long-lasting impact on the customer experience. This is why it’s critical to develop an evidence-based strategy built on the principles of human factors and ergonomics.
This is particularly true for automotive startups, where the success of their first vehicle can determine the future of the entire company. Getting the HMI right from the start isn’t just important—it’s vital to survival.
Take the Lucid Air, launched in 2021, as an example. While innovative, the vehicle's HMI had several notable flaws, seemingly ignoring human-centred design principles:
• Obstructed Instrument Cluster: Large portions of the instrument cluster are blocked by the steering wheel, and this issue worsens when the driver’s hands are on the wheel, further obstructing critical information.
• Steering Wheel Button Reach: The lower row of buttons on the steering wheel is positioned too far for easy thumb reach, making them uncomfortable to operate while driving.
• Low Climate Control Display: The climate control display is positioned too low in the cabin, requiring long glances away from the road to interact with the controls—something that significantly detracts from safety and usability.
Where was the research? Where were the human modelling simulations? Who represented the customer when these decisions were made?
Having worked with world-class designers, I know their natural ability to craft solutions that truly suit the user. More importantly, great designers listen to the evidence. Unfortunately, in some cases, there are designers who don’t even drive but still think they have all the answers.
It seems that Lucid recognised these issues and is working to rectify them in their upcoming Lucid Gravity, set to launch in late 2024 (though I still have some concerns around the steering wheel, instrument cluster, and air vent efficiency). It’s a good example of learning and iterating, but also a reminder of how critical it is to make the right evidence-driven HMI decisions early on, particularly for startups.
When you’re dealing with challenges in powertrain, electrical architecture, or vehicle dynamics, customer-facing attributes often take a back seat. Sometimes it’s easier to cherry-pick testimonials or rely on paid influencers that align with your decisions—I get it. But only when we are truly committed to evidence-based decisions and the principles of human factors and ergonomics can we create an HMI that not only pleases the customer but also helps the company thrive in the long term.
Usability always wins
Usability always wins. Design trends come and go, but at the end of the day, good usability remains.
In an effort to modernise their interior design, VW introduced capacitive touch buttons on the steering wheel. However, this change compromised usability, user experience, and led to customer complaints. Recognising these issues, VW reverted to physical buttons in their latest models—a clear acknowledgment that simplicity and functionality often deliver the best user experience, especially in environments where safety is critical.
While I acknowledge VW for having the courage to correct course, I suspect that the initial decision to implement capacitive buttons ignored critical usability data in favour of a sleek design. Having conducted multiple experiments on this steering wheel myself, it consistently underperformed and received poor usability scores. It’s hard to believe VW’s own teams weren’t aware of these flaws, but it seems design won out over putting the user first.
This trend isn’t limited to VW customers. When a major player like VW implements such interfaces, it pressures other automakers to follow suit, as if “if VW is doing it, it must be right.” I’ve certainly felt the pressure to adopt similar trends, but I always trust the data and the evidence, which helped me push back on such decisions. That said, it’s not always easy. Building a strong HMI strategy requires navigating the tension between design trends and user-centred functionality.
Looking ahead, I hope for two things: that VW will rethink their climate controls, and that my beloved Audi won’t follow down the same path.
The Renault 5 E-Tech Electric: Probably the Coolest Model Rebirth
Legacy is often seen as a burden, but Renault has turned it into an advantage. The new Renault 5 doesn’t just pay homage to its past—it leverages it. This new Renault 5 addresses today’s needs while maintaining the character of a legend.
You don’t need to know anything about its past to appreciate it, but for enthusiasts, there are plenty of hidden gems that will truly excite. Renault has masterfully blended nostalgia with innovation.
As for the HMI, I’m undecided. The steering wheel seems solid, similar to the Scenic, and I appreciate the gear selector as a lever—it frees up space on the central console, which is always a plus. However, I need to experience it firsthand to fully understand the interactions. The separation in z-axis seems well-designed, allowing for independent operation of gears and wipers, which is crucial. I suspect, though, that its position might block some of the user interface. I miss the climate controls of the Clio, and I believe that a display with more height would be advantageous for features such as navigation. I speculate that design lines were a priority, which is often the case, and understandable for such a model.
Overall, I find Renault’s approach to model revival very relevant and refreshing.