Why is the NAV screen of such crappy quality?

But keep in mind the other feature improvements on the Gen III coupled with the fact that the price was actually reduced when comparing similarly priced models. I think you'd be hard pressed to say Toyota is profiting more from the Gen III than the Gen II.

 

And what were the grand total of those three price increases?

 

I still don't understand the NEED for high resolution on our NAVI. Where exactly does this high resolution actually help other than bragging rights??? Wouldn't USB and BT Audio streaming be much much more useful to everyone????

 

Its purely an aesthetic thing. Don't get me wrong, the high res screen is really nice, I have it in the Lexus...but I wouldn't consider it a major criteria when selecting a car...

 

Paper Map...$3.99
Garmin... $99.00
Prius NAV Option (MSRP)...$1930.00 (source: KBB )

Being able to get there while reading a lively debate about NAV screen resolution....priceless!

Thanks PRIUSChat!!!

 

Lol

 

ahh, i see. Still, i need USB from now on in every car that i buy...i love my Ipod Touch!!!

 

Higher resolution means more map detail, more space for soft buttons, and bigger menus. I prefer higher resolution coupled with a larger physical size.

Who needs it? No one really needs it. No one really needs a Prius either. It's all comes down to wants. Your wants are not the same as my wants. That doesn't make mine wrong, or yours wrong, that just makes them different. This is what keeps life interesting for marketing people, and why we have options.

Tom

 

Hmmm, i need to take a closer look next time in my Sienna...i did not notice much of anything you wrote Tom....

The difference from Apple Iphones is that you don't play games nor watch movies in a Prius with the OEM setup. (And yes, i love Retina display!)

 

BTW, maybe the fact that my Prius NAVI screen is huge and that is why i don't notice much difference in what Tom was saying when comparing with my Sienna's NAVI.

 

T think the real question should be "Why is the NAV system of such crappy quality?"

 

That is a real question. A company like Toyota should be able to do better.

It's telling that most of the posters on this thread refer to the Navi or Nav screen, while I use the term MFD. Right there shows a fundamental difference in utility and what we expect from the screen, and helps explain why some owners think the new screen is fine, while others wish it were at least as big as the Gen II screen.

I envision the touch screen encompassing even more utility, where it now has been reduced to mostly just a Nav screen. It's much like the difference in cell phone displays: a person who only uses his cell phone for calls can't understand why a smart phone power user want a big color screen. It's all about utility and expectations. Neither is right or wrong, but they each have their own expectation.

Tom

 

Once you go higher resolution and more color, it is hard to go back. Yes, my Gen2 Iconic Prius has Lexus grade screen (same user interface).

I don't blame Toyota for going back to the lower resolution as 2004 and 2005 models had the same low resolution screen. Is it cost cutting? I don't know... they threw in SKS and touch tracer as a standard option so something else has to give.

The upcoming Entune has higher resolution so hopefully 2012 Prius would be offered with it.

 

So by this reasoning we couldn't discuss wanting power seats, since the Gen III doesn't have them? How about extendable sun visors? Nope, the Gen III doesn't have those either. I don't want either of those, but they should be up for discussion.



This is just a silly line of logic. I would like a BIG color MFD, even though the Gen III doesn't have one.

Tom

 

Is the 17" screen from the Tesla S big enough?

 

:thumb: