The Car Is Smarter. But Is It Better?

New Delhi, Oct. 24 -- Look mom, no buttons!

Remember when driving a car was relatively straightforward? You adjusted the rear-view mirror, turned a knob to adjust the AC to your liking, pulled a stalk to spray water on the windscreen and operate the wipers, pressed the clutch and shifted into gear. Complicated, was it? Apparently. So complicated that the auto industry has spent years trying to improve on your morning car ritual.

Today, a large-sized screen controls everything: the temperature in the cabin and the song you hum along to. Some dashboards are now oversized tablets, while physical buttons have been dispatched to the extinct list. In a showroom, the result is spectacular. A screen lights up, menus glide across its surface and the salesperson pulls up features that leave you spellbound. The car looks futuristic. The buyer feels upgraded.

Then comes the drive. It starts raining. You need to adjust the wipers, reduce the fan speed and want the music off. Suddenly, you find yourself on a digital app hunt while the traffic outside decides whether it should let you survive.

Many Distractions

This is not simply a case of an old-fashioned motorist complaining about modernity. Research has begun to quantify the trade-off. A March 2026 review of 73 studies found that touchscreen controls tended to perform worse than physical or voice controls on measures including driving performance, visual attention and the completion of tasks, although results varied by task and design.

An August 2026 driving-simulator study went a step further. When participants used touchscreens for tasks requiring multiple interactions, they performed worse both at the task and at driving. Their distraction increased across the tasks tested. These findings do not establish that touchscreens are dangerous. But they do challenge the assumption that putting more functions behind slick glass makes a car better.

The problem is not the screen. Navigation maps, reversing-camera displays, entertainment and complex settings can benefit from a good interface. The problem arises when manufacturers use the same interface to replace controls that drivers need to operate quickly, frequently or without looking away from the road.

There is a reason we don't expect airline pilots to navigate every essential cockpit function through a succession of menus. Driving is not flying, of course, but neither activity benefits when the operator must take their eyes off the task to find the means of controlling it.

Conditional Assistance

This distinction matters when we move from infotainment to safety. Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) can warn drivers of impending collisions, help maintain distance from vehicles ahead, detect hazards and intervene to prevent or reduce the severity of an accident. These are meaningful advances. But assistance is not autonomy. A driver who mistakes a warning system for a fail-proof guardian angel becomes less attentive when attention truly matters.

India adds another complication. Our roads combine inconsistent lane markings, sudden lane changes, two-wheelers squeezing through gaps, pedestrians crossing on a whim and a prayer, and vehicles travelling in directions that would shock even the most imaginative navigation system. A study of ADAS performance in Indian driving conditions highlighted how infrastructure limitations, unpredictable behaviour and local traffic patterns affect system effectiveness.

Features or Fashion?

Why, then, does the industry continue to chase ever-larger screens, longer feature lists and elaborate electronic interfaces? Because technology needs to be visible, demonstrable and eminently marketable. For the cars to sell more.

A manufacturer can advertise a 12-inch screen more easily than it can advertise an intuitive dashboard. A panoramic display can look beautiful in a photograph. A dozen connected functions look more convincing in a presentation. The ability to operate a frequently used control without taking your eyes off the road is far less glamorous in a sales brochure, although eminently more valuable.

This is where the industry's priorities deserve scrutiny. Are we measuring progress by the number of features fitted, or by how effectively those features serve the driver?

Consider the basics. Is the driving position comfortable? Can you see clearly in every direction? Are the seats supportive on long drives? Does the suspension cope with broken roads? Are the controls intuitive? Does the car respond predictably, and can its safety systems be trusted to perform? These questions are hardly revolutionary. Yet they are central to whether a car is genuinely good to live with.

Smarter is Enough?

Ultimately, the car is not a gadget that happens to have four wheels. It is a machine expected to transport people safely, comfortably and reliably through conditions that can be unpredictable and unforgiving. The best technology often makes itself almost invisible. It works when required, stays out of the way when not needed and allows the driver to concentrate on driving. The best interface is not the one with the most dazzling graphics; it is the one that makes the right action obvious.

Manufacturers need to resist the temptation to treat physical controls as relics just because touchscreens look more contemporary. Frequently used and safety-critical functions deserve simple, accessible controls, whether physical or otherwise. Screens should complement them, not become an obstacle course.

Buyers play a role too. When choosing a car, try operating its controls before being dazzled by the tech list. Ask whether the technology makes driving easier. Test the interface, understand the assistance systems and distinguish between features that sound impressive and those that truly improve your experience.

The industry has made cars more capable, connected and safer. That cannot be overstated. But the next leap forward does not always involve another screen, another menu or another electronic acronym. Sometimes, progress means adding a clever new capability. Sometimes, it means retaining a simple button because it works better.

A car may be smarter than its predecessor. The more important question is whether its makers have been smart enough to make it better.

Published by HT Digital Content Services with permission from Millennium Post.