molested_cow wrote:IMO it further separates the user from the participation of an experience. Of course, you can say that the "experience" here is the convenience from driving a Lexus, but what does this mean in the bigger picture?
Don't you think you're getting a tad carried away on the experience design kick? Washing my clothes by hand is an experience too, but one that I'm well happy to let my washing machine take care of. The point of designing for experiences is that people should want to take part, not be forced into something they don't enjoy. Not everyone is as tuned into the value of product experiences as we are, nor does everyone enjoy driving as much as transportation designers.
This reminds me a bit of what the reaction must have been like when Automatic Transmission was introduced. If you enjoy the experience of parallel parking, or the experience of driving in general, you're free to continue to do so - nobody is forcing these technologies on you.
molested_cow wrote:At least from a personal point of view, I won't find it "ethical" to include such a feature in cars.
I don't understand by any means how you could find this unethical. It's just a service solution for something many people don't enjoy and unfortunately are often quite bad at. I can't believe how often I see people around LA hit the car in front or behind them - or both - when trying to park. If there are any moral dilemmas stemming from cars, this solution should be very low on the list (Hemi engines come to mind).
molested_cow wrote:It will be great for drivers with disabilities,
...and isn't there value in that alone? Especially in North America where the public transportation system is so poor, universal design solutions such as these should be applauded. While I agree that driving is a privilege, I struggle with that on such a black & white level in cities with little public transportation infrastructure. Mobility is a right.
molested_cow wrote: but not on a flagship car.
Why not? Considering Lexus was the first to introduce a Hybrid SUV, and the vision they were promoting in Minority Report, this kind of technology leadership fits their brand promise quite well.
molested_cow wrote:I simply don't think making a car park itself is a solution. If it is parallel parking that bothers people, then why not come out with a urban plan that gets rid of the need to parallel park altogether?
The challenges present in an urban plan change en masse are not insignificant, if not entirely impractical. New parking solutions like 45degree angled parking are great. However, simple changes like that take years, a lot of resources to implement, and more physical space. Additionally, the user has no control over infrastructure changes, so for the individual who does not like to parallel park they are better with a solution they personally can buy.
molested_cow wrote: if Lexus really wants to provide luxury, why not just send a chauffer, or provide a "Lexus Executive 24/7 Parking Service"?
Again, this is not practical. Weâ€™re talking about a Lexus here, not a Maybach.
Lmo wrote:I don't have much sympathy for those who can't "drive"; "drive" being defined as all the personal skills necessary to pilot a motor vehicle on public streets.
Parallel parking is not driving. While I know there are a lot of people on the road that maybe shouldn't be, you can't assume that just because someone can't (or doesn't like to) parallel park that they aren't a safe driver. If you have a problem with the testing standards in North America that's another issue, but if they can afford a Lexus they likely have a state issued license. And again, in N.A. society provides an unfortunate few public transportation alternatives.
Yes, the Lexus solution is a bit crude and complicated, but it's a first generation technology. These things tend to get better.
Why is there this hesitancy towards automation guys? I've seen so many automateddriving concepts
the last several years which I thought to be steps
in the rightdirection
. Anyway relax, it's mostly a showy tech gimmick and you're not likely to see it too often (for now at least). Consumers will ultimately decide whether or not the technology succeeds.