One Of The Most Hated New-Car Trends Is Finally Reversing
If you’ve been in any new car in 2026, you will have realized that almost no new car comes without a touchscreen. What used to be a luxury feature in the early 2000s is now standard on almost every new car for sale today.
Unfortunately, the moment automakers realized they could pour all of a vehicle’s functions into a single touchscreen was when they also waged war against physical controls. Browse through social media, and you’ll see that this often isn’t a welcome change. If you are one of them, then there is a bit of good news for you.
Automakers have begun realizing that this isn’t what customers want, and some automakers have backtracked on their war on physical controls. The question is, why did automakers go down this route, and what makes customers (or social media users) hate touchscreen-based controls? That is what this article aims to find out.
Don’t Push My Buttons
Automakers have certainly pushed the buttons of consumers and would-be car buyers with the removal of physical controls, but how did it come to this in the first place? There are two companies to blame—one directly and the other indirectly—for dictating tech trends in the past decade.
When Flashy Tech Meets Car Design
It was 2007. Apple released the iPhone with a breathtaking keyboard-less design. It was sleek, radical, and with barely any bezels, it looked like you were literally just holding a screen. Somehow, a man named Elon Musk thought that translating this sleek idea into a car interior would be a good idea. As it turned out, it initially did. Tesla released the Model S in 2012, and its sleek exterior, as well as its high-tech and button-less interior, got a lot of jaw-dropping reactions. It was as if Apple were to design a car; this would probably be it.
Since then, the large touchscreen and button-less layout have been sold and marketed as luxury by Tesla and other automakers. Why tinker with physical controls when a touchscreen felt like the future? Or was it really? Does an Apple Watch have the same tactile satisfaction as a Grand Seiko? Automakers think so, and since then, almost everyone has tried to emulate Tesla’s interior ergonomics, as it was sleek like a smartphone.
Buttoning Up For The Future
With buttons, you can reach for a certain feature and interact with it without looking away from the road. Your body memorizes the clicks of a switch, the shape of a button, and where it’s located in the interior through muscle memory. Thankfully, widespread consumer disdain is helping bring back these controls.
Fewer Buttons, More Cognitive Load
In 2023, Swedish motoring magazine Vi Bilägare selected 11 modern cars plus a 2005 Volvo V70 without a touchscreen as the baseline comparison. The driver was told to drive at 110 km/h (68 mph) while executing four tasks. Ease of use was measured in seconds and by how far the vehicle had driven while the driver was executing the four tasks. The driver was also given time to become familiar with the touchscreen.
At the far end of the spectrum was the MG Marvel R—an electric crossover with no physical controls. The driver took 44.6 seconds to finish all four tasks, during which the vehicle covered a distance of 1,372 meters or 1.372 kilometers (0.85 miles). The BMW iX, fared better, but the driver still needed almost a kilometer to finish the task.
Despite featuring a touchscreen, the Dacia Sandero and Volvo C40 Recharge performed well enough, though they still traveled an additional 100 meters beyond the baseline 2005 Volvo V70. As for the 17-year-old (at the time) V70, to no one’s surprise, the driver took just 10 seconds and 306 meters—the shortest time and distance among the group—to complete all four tasks.
And Regulators Are On The Same Page
Thankfully, automotive regulators worldwide are aligned with consumer sentiment on this issue. In Australia, ANCAP will give a vehicle a higher score if it has physical controls for key functions such as the horn, turn signals, hazard lights, windshield wipers, and headlights, or at least dedicates a fixed portion of the screen to these primary driving functions. It’s a similar case in Europe, too, where the Euro NCAP will only award a higher rating if these controls are physical. Euro NCAP and ANCAP’s requirements may not address the removal of physical climate controls, but this is still a step in the right direction.
The Industry’s Response
Another piece of good news is that there have been a few automakers who have proactively kept physical controls on their vehicles in varying degrees in direct response to consumer sentiment. At the other end of the spectrum, there are still automakers who insist on this interior layout, but regulations may change that in the future.
Automakers Who Listened
Hyundai Motor Group (HMG), which includes Kia and Genesis, has long recognized consumer sentiment on physical controls. This is why their interiors have been applauded despite the increased dependency on software. Even with the newly introduced Pleos operating system and SDV platform, the recently unveiled Elantra and Tucson still have physical controls.
Volkswagen Group is likewise bringing back or retaining physical controls to its interiors, especially with the backlash it received when it replaced the physical buttons with the much-hated wonky touch-capacitive controls. The new wave of vehicles like the I.D. Polo for Europe has plenty of physical controls despite also being a software-heavy EV. Porsche, meanwhile, has largely kept physical controls in most of its vehicles, except for the Taycan.
Other automakers that never ditched physical controls in their interiors include brands like Honda and its luxury brand Acura. In fact, their tactile knobs and buttons have always been a selling point for their modern interiors. Toyota, despite introducing its Arene OS for the new RAV4, still has a healthy amount of physical controls, even if they are trying to make it look minimal in its interior design.
Automakers Going Against The Grain
For now, Tesla seems to be forging ahead with its ultra-minimalist, button-less interior layout, though it’s interesting to see how its interiors will evolve since it will have no choice but to comply with the regulations where its vehicles are sold. This is likely the case for other EV startups like Rivian and Lucid, whose SDV electronics architectures heavily favor touch-only operations unless dictated by regulations.
Perhaps the most controversial automaker as of late that has gone with the all-touch control layout is Mazda, and you can see how consumers express their dismay in almost every piece of content about the new CX-5. What makes Mazda’s case surprising to many consumers is that it was a brand that heavily insisted on physical controls—to the point that it was even the highlight of its interiors.
Lastly, this automaker may be a case of development timing, but Mercedes-Benz’s newest interiors have truly waged war on physical controls. The MBUX Superscreen or Hyperscreen touts its pillar-to-pillar display, but recently, its Chief Design Officer, Gorden Wagener, has recognized that they may have gone too far with this interior layout.
Sources: OEMs, NCAP
Related posts
Latest Post
No Comments