Sponsored

CommodoreAmiga

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Threads
39
Messages
4,104
Reaction score
7,706
Location
INACTIVE
Vehicles
INACTIVE
This might just be me but I wish they'd skipped the rear screen. It's unlikely to have interesting non-climate features (games/moves/etc.) barring some real surprises re: processor horsepower, and it eats up a ton of legroom and adds visual clutter. I'd rather see this controlled from the front or just some physical toggles. Oh well.
I must disagree. My current vehicle has a rear screen for climate and it's a wonderful thing. When adults or teenagers back there it's nice letting them have control over their own comfort without having to bug the driver or front-passenger. We also found that people would wait to become uncomfortable before feeling compelled to ask for an adjustment. But with the screen, they can preemptively set the HVAC so they're comfortable. Excellent.

The only alternative that might have worked is to put the buttons and a small screen (watched sized would be sufficient) on the rear doors... Now that I think of it, that would be unique and kind of cool... Maybe a vehicle will try that, at some point.
Sponsored

 

CommodoreAmiga

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Threads
39
Messages
4,104
Reaction score
7,706
Location
INACTIVE
Vehicles
INACTIVE
These lawsuits are very often settled confidentially, but they're absolutely a real thing and a huge part of any product with a human interface element.
Sounds like you can buy a R1 and sue Rivian and make some quick cash?

Let us know how that works out for ya.
 

kylealden

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kyle
Joined
Feb 25, 2021
Threads
20
Messages
1,393
Reaction score
4,254
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Rivian R1T LE, Tesla Model Y, Zero DSR/X, '69 CJ5
Occupation
Product Management
I must disagree. My current vehicle has a rear screen for climate and it's a wonderful thing. When adults or teenagers back there it's nice letting them have control over their own comfort without having to bug the driver or front-passenger. We also found that people would wait to become uncomfortable before feeling compelled to ask for an adjustment. But with the screen, they can preemptively set the HVAC so they're comfortable. Excellent.
Fair point and I'm glad to hear it. I do hate having to prompt Tesla passengers to ask about climate/seat heat/etc. I'm just not crazy about the size/placement/backlighting here, which seems like it would be distracting to passengers and downright obstructive to a middle-seat occupant. ?‍♂
 

MountainBikeDude

Well-Known Member
First Name
Adam
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Threads
40
Messages
1,878
Reaction score
3,845
Location
Vancouver
Vehicles
2023 El Cap Quad Motor R1T (Selling the Xterra)
Clubs
 
Anyone know what the elements (that look like reflectors) are in the sides of the headrests?
I honestly thought for a long time they would be small supplementary speakers, similar to I think a Nissan Kicks, where it has bose speakers in the sides of the head rest. But from everything we know now about the audio system, seems more like decorative accents than a functional feature.
 

kylealden

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kyle
Joined
Feb 25, 2021
Threads
20
Messages
1,393
Reaction score
4,254
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Rivian R1T LE, Tesla Model Y, Zero DSR/X, '69 CJ5
Occupation
Product Management
Sounds like you can buy a R1 and sue Rivian and make some quick cash?

Let us know how that works out for ya.
I'm not sure why you're being glib here. I'm not suggesting Rivian is liable or even in the wrong. You might want to reread my post, which specifically ends with me saying we don't know enough to know if they have an issue.

But it's ignorant and wrong-headed to dismiss accessibility as a design factor or suggest that it can't be a liability issue. I can almost guarantee that any major software or device company you can think of has faced and probably settled dizzying lawsuits on this issue.

And more importantly, products shouldn't be accessible only to people exactly like you. We live in a society.
 

Sponsored

Surferdude

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
128
Reaction score
186
Location
Hawaii
Vehicles
Tesla
USB-C all around is a nice surprise. For those stuck in the old times, there's the 12V plug for your own charger.
I don't understand why anyone likes these USB-C ports. As I understand it, they have very limited output... about 15 watts. My phone's charger is 45 watts so plugging my phone into the USB-C charger would take 3X longer. I would literally never use them. And future phones/tablets will require more and more output will you're stuck at whatever you got in 2021. At least with the "old times" cigarette lighter adapter I can plug a tiny inverter in and get up to 100 watts of power. Enough to keep small electronics charged at the highest rate at least for a few more years. The USB-C chargers are already obsolete. Hopefully I'm wrong and they are much higher output than 15 watts.
 

scooter

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 21, 2021
Threads
3
Messages
109
Reaction score
138
Location
WI
Vehicles
BMW 1250GS
Clubs
 
It could be a plunger of some kind to open the door with a remote like what the Mach-E has? Sandy Munroe Mach-E tear down video showed how that works on the Ford.


Anyone else notice this?

Pretty sure that's an extra "door catch" to keep it water tight for all the river crossings and boat launch fails!

1623952440939.png
 

Inkedsphynx

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 27, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
1,021
Reaction score
2,031
Location
Washington
Vehicles
'22 LE R1T, '21 CB500FA, '21 CMX1100A
I don't understand why anyone likes these USB-C ports. As I understand it, they have very limited output... about 15 watts. My phone's charger is 45 watts so plugging my phone into the USB-C charger would take 3X longer. I would literally never use them. And future phones/tablets will require more and more output will you're stuck at whatever you got in 2021. At least with the "old times" cigarette lighter adapter I can plug a tiny inverter in and get up to 100 watts of power. Enough to keep small electronics charged at the highest rate at least for a few more years. The USB-C chargers are already obsolete. Hopefully I'm wrong and they are much higher output than 15 watts.
I use USB-C to charge every day.

I charge my phone in my car on USB-C.

I charge my phone off my laptop using USB-C.

I charge my phone off the add-on 'fast' charge brick which uses, you guessed it, USB-C.

I charge my laptop off a power brick (96W) using... USB-C.

Lastly, phones don't stop charging at 15W, they just do it a little slower. If these are only 15W ports then I guess you'll have to wait those extra few minutes to get a charge.
 

kylealden

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kyle
Joined
Feb 25, 2021
Threads
20
Messages
1,393
Reaction score
4,254
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Rivian R1T LE, Tesla Model Y, Zero DSR/X, '69 CJ5
Occupation
Product Management
I don't understand why anyone likes these USB-C ports. As I understand it, they have very limited output... about 15 watts.
Where are you getting the output wattage? My Model Y's USB-C ports put out at least 30W (more than enough to power a modest laptop or fast-charge a phone) and the USB-C Power Delivery spec allows for output up to 100W today. I definitely hope the R1T has high-wattage ports with Power Delivery, but if it doesn't, it's not a limitation of USB-C.

In any case, I'd take 15W in a slim, reversible, universal cable over a fussy and fragile cigarette lighter port on the back of my headrest, or AC ports that power bricks are going to hang precariously out of. It's possible that they cheap out and it won't fast charge every device (I'd be disappointed, but there is an AC port in the cab if you want that), but it beats nothing by a long shot.
 

CommodoreAmiga

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Threads
39
Messages
4,104
Reaction score
7,706
Location
INACTIVE
Vehicles
INACTIVE
Fair point and I'm glad to hear it. I do hate having to prompt Tesla passengers to ask about climate/seat heat/etc. I'm just not crazy about the size/placement/backlighting here, which seems like it would be distracting to passengers and downright obstructive to a middle-seat occupant. ?‍♂
In my current vehicle, the screen dims considerably after a few seconds. You tap it and it goes full-brightness. Maybe Rivian will do something similar? I haven't heard any complaints about it being distracting. Keep in mind it's down below their knees -- not even in their line of sight unless they look down at it.
 

Sponsored

Autolycus

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2021
Threads
14
Messages
2,030
Reaction score
3,116
Location
ATL
Vehicles
ICE only :(
I don't understand why anyone likes these USB-C ports. As I understand it, they have very limited output... about 15 watts. My phone's charger is 45 watts so plugging my phone into the USB-C charger would take 3X longer. I would literally never use them. And future phones/tablets will require more and more output will you're stuck at whatever you got in 2021. At least with the "old times" cigarette lighter adapter I can plug a tiny inverter in and get up to 100 watts of power. Enough to keep small electronics charged at the highest rate at least for a few more years. The USB-C chargers are already obsolete. Hopefully I'm wrong and they are much higher output than 15 watts.
First, it's rare that I need a fast charge in the car. If I'm bothering to plug my phone in at all, it's because I'm in the car for an extended period on a road trip.

Second, there's a 110v outlet as well. That's even better than the old 12V cigarette lighter type. And there's one of those anyway.
 

CommodoreAmiga

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Threads
39
Messages
4,104
Reaction score
7,706
Location
INACTIVE
Vehicles
INACTIVE
I'm not sure why you're being glib here. I'm not suggesting Rivian is liable or even in the wrong. You might want to reread my post, which specifically ends with me saying we don't know enough to know if they have an issue.

But it's ignorant and wrong-headed to dismiss accessibility as a design factor or suggest that it can't be a liability issue. I can almost guarantee that any major software or device company you can think of has faced and probably settled dizzying lawsuits on this issue.

And more importantly, products shouldn't be accessible only to people exactly like you. We live in a society.
Sorry, but the tone I read your post in was very "how dare Rivian..." I just think the "let's sue them" mentality is too prevalent in our society. I think we should accommodate people within reason, but also consumers should vote with their wallets.

As to your last sentence:

Rivian R1T R1S INTERIOR feature / details just posted at Rivian.com 1623954638441
 

MountainBikeDude

Well-Known Member
First Name
Adam
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Threads
40
Messages
1,878
Reaction score
3,845
Location
Vancouver
Vehicles
2023 El Cap Quad Motor R1T (Selling the Xterra)
Clubs
 
These lawsuits are very often settled confidentially, but they're absolutely a real thing and a huge part of any product with a human interface element. I'm not sure about vehicles, but computing devices (operating systems, software, web properties) have a very high bar for accessibility compliance.

Take your iPhone example - iPhones are extremely functional to a blind or partially-sighted user thanks to features like VoiceOver. Go watch some videos of blind folks flying through their iPhones - it will blow your mind. Likewise Macs/PCs and all major web browsers devote enormous engineering effort to accessibility frameworks and interfacing with assistive technologies like screen readers.

While these product teams are typically genuinely passionate about the work for reasons of principal, you don't have to be very cynical to wonder why for-profit companies spend more on it than a strict market analysis might "justify."

That being said - let me hop on my soapbox.

Accessibility advocates will always (rightly) point out that accessibility is not about compliance nor some minority class of disabled users. Ability is a spectrum and everyone's ability varies, whether situationally (holding a cup of coffee in one hand, focused on driving, injured, contacts fell out) or permanently (blind, impaired color vision, deaf or hard of hearing, missing limbs, permanent motor disorders or other physical factors), etc.

Good design for accessibility is a win for all users - controls that are accessible from both sides of the cabin mean the driver can access them without a passenger, or the passenger can access them when the driver is focusing. Controls which are accessible with low vision are also accessible with lots of glare, dust, or other interference. Every designer should take this into account.

It's hard to say whether Rivian has an issue here - we don't know how much of the UI is reconfigurable or redundant with physical controls (such as the wheel buttons), or how effective Alexa will be as a backup for some of the on-screen controls. I'm optimistic that they'll have thought this through. But we absolutely shouldn't give them a pass on accessible design.
While I understand the need for accessible controls and features, not too many blind people are going to be driving a Rivian. I did on an occasion let my Visually Impaired buddy (to see a computer, needs to have his nose 2" from the screen) drive my xterra with me in the passenger seat, helping him to drive for the first time in his life down a logging road for several kilometers. It blew his mind! something he could really never be allowed to do, but there he was, driving like a boss!

Kinda strayed off topic there but, Rivian, while not necessarily having physical controls for things like a traditional vehicle, does have Alexa voice integration "Alexa do my bidding" "ok" so that physical, or touchscreen controls become less necessary while driving.
 

CommodoreAmiga

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Threads
39
Messages
4,104
Reaction score
7,706
Location
INACTIVE
Vehicles
INACTIVE
I don't understand why anyone likes these USB-C ports. As I understand it, they have very limited output... about 15 watts. My phone's charger is 45 watts so plugging my phone into the USB-C charger would take 3X longer. I would literally never use them. And future phones/tablets will require more and more output will you're stuck at whatever you got in 2021. At least with the "old times" cigarette lighter adapter I can plug a tiny inverter in and get up to 100 watts of power. Enough to keep small electronics charged at the highest rate at least for a few more years. The USB-C chargers are already obsolete. Hopefully I'm wrong and they are much higher output than 15 watts.
USB-C supports 100W in it's standard form. Most auto manufacturers are supplying them with less power because most cell phones only need 5-15W to charge at a decent rate... But USB-C definitely supports more. I have an extremely powerful laptop and it charges exclusively over USB-C.

I don't think Rivian has released it's power limits for their USB-C ports. It'd be nice if they supported the full 100W so we can charge laptops.
 

MIG

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2021
Threads
24
Messages
447
Reaction score
670
Location
Chicago
Vehicles
Prius; R1S
These lawsuits are very often settled confidentially, but they're absolutely a real thing and a huge part of any product with a human interface element. I'm not sure about vehicles, but computing devices (operating systems, software, web properties) have a very high bar for accessibility compliance.

Take your iPhone example - iPhones are extremely functional to a blind or partially-sighted user thanks to features like VoiceOver. Go watch some videos of blind folks flying through their iPhones - it will blow your mind. Likewise Macs/PCs and all major web browsers devote enormous engineering effort to accessibility frameworks and interfacing with assistive technologies like screen readers.

While these product teams are typically genuinely passionate about the work for reasons of principal, you don't have to be very cynical to wonder why for-profit companies spend more on it than a strict market analysis might "justify."

That being said - let me hop on my soapbox.

Accessibility advocates will always (rightly) point out that accessibility is not about compliance nor some minority class of disabled users. Ability is a spectrum and everyone's ability varies, whether situationally (holding a cup of coffee in one hand, focused on driving, injured, contacts fell out) or permanently (blind, impaired color vision, deaf or hard of hearing, missing limbs, permanent motor disorders or other physical factors), etc.

Good design for accessibility is a win for all users - controls that are accessible from both sides of the cabin mean the driver can access them without a passenger, or the passenger can access them when the driver is focusing. Controls which are accessible with low vision are also accessible with lots of glare, dust, or other interference. Every designer should take this into account.

It's hard to say whether Rivian has an issue here - we don't know how much of the UI is reconfigurable or redundant with physical controls (such as the wheel buttons), or how effective Alexa will be as a backup for some of the on-screen controls. I'm optimistic that they'll have thought this through. But we absolutely shouldn't give them a pass on accessible design.

Where to start?

1. You have not incurred any injury yet.
2. You're aware of a "potential" issue before you've made any purchase. Would make it hard to argue that you were somehow cheated should you now - with that knowledge - decide to purchase the vehicle.
3. I have owned and/or driven a number of vehicles with joystick/single control wheel controls of nearly all interior functions. Where has your outrage been over those?
4. These suits are not resolved in secrecy. Once you invoke the rights of a class of individuals you need buy-in from those persons. At a minimum they will be notified of the proposed resolution and given an opportunity to provide their feedback. Not as easy as you seem to think it is.
Sponsored

 
 




Top