Will Toyota ever stop trying to protect us from ourselves....?

maddog,

There is hope. You can replace the unit with an after market head unit that works the way you want it. They aren't perfect but they fix the things you highlighted.

Nothing will get you to use the touch tracer real estate though. But you do get a beep for low gas, with plenty of time to fill up.

 

I ended up not getting the nav unit because it was overpriced and had severe flaws. The iPod support is also crap.

The sad part is they could easily do what you suggest with good results, but I get the feeling they farmed out those bits to third parties with poor guidance. Heck, if they did nothing more than a touch screen analog of the classic iPod UI it would be better than 99% of what is available on any car brand I've seen.

 

I forgot to add that the "nanny mode" could be minimized if every time the car prevents you from doing something legal and useful in the name of safety, an electric shock is applied to a Toyota executive. Then they could "feel your pain" and think twice about who owns the freaking car.

 

You can speak a destination whenever you want.

 

Given that the iPod was launched October 23, 2001 and the Prius first went on sale in Japan in 1997, whining that the Prius does not resemble the iPod may have the cart before the horse. Next they will be whining that the USB interface is not configured for the iPad introduced last week, as if Toyota could know Apples' plans. (oh wait, they already are)

 

I am confused. I can change my nav destination and also access my iphone song lists and choose songs when my car is moving at whatever speeds because my wife changes them.

 

How about putting the Mute button on the radio next to the driver...or even better how about putting the mute button on the steering wheel...so annoying to have to shut off the radio when the phone rings...

 

Actually thats something I liked about the Prius I have the built in bluetooth. When the phone rings the radio automatically gets muted and when the phone ends the music will come back on.

 

I'm pretty sure Toyota has made a Prius after 2001, since I own one. If you see no value in integration with an iPod, that is your choice. Even Toyota has acknowledged there is demand for iPod integration as evidenced by their clumsy and mostly ineffective attempts to do so. Insulting everyone who desires this feature as "whining" is really stupid and pointless.

Doing an adequate job of iPod integration is a trivial task in comparison to the development of the Prius hybrid drive. Toyota has yet to put the effort into actually doing it right.

 

Alas...I got a II...no majic Bluetooth for me...

 

If you have a II Model (like me), just buy a $200 Garmin with Bluetooth. Can use it in all vehicles, rental car, bike, skateboard, etc.
Bart in SoCAL

 

If you hold down the "Mode" button (center of left-side steering wheel buttons) it turns off the radio, no matter what's playing. When you're done with your phone call hit it again and it will come back on. So you can use that like a mute button, it just takes a couple of seconds.

Or of course you could just press the power/volume button on the center console, it's not far from your right hand if it's on the wheel, it's more instantaneous.

 

You live in the UK: different legal system. Toyota is rightfully afraid of our overly litigious system in the USA. When people do something stupid in this country, we blame the manufacturer. If you spill hot coffee in your lap while driving, you sue McDonald's.

Tom

 

Based on the ridiculous results of several consumer court cases in this country, I don't think Toyota is trying to protect you from "inattentive driving." I think Toyota is trying to protect itself from a law suit from someone who causes a wreck due to using NAV while driving and then blaming Toyota. My example is the hot MacDonald's coffee that a woman spilled in her lap while driving. She blamed MacDonalds for the resulting accident, because the coffee was too hot. MacDonalds lost the case. It's easy to see how someone would blame Toyota for an accident caused due to their use of the NAV while driving ... and our justice system would find Toyota responsible. Sad!

 

McDonalds didn't lose the case because the woman spilled hot coffee in her lap. They lost it because the coffee was SCALDING hot.
Know the Facts: The McDonalds Coffee Case

 

Good info, thanks. However, your reference also shows that the final decision has been kept secret. My question is "How will we ever know what 'justice' was in this case?"

I still believe that Toyota intentionally designed the NAV not to allow input while the car is in motion because of possible lawsuits. In that regard, I believe they are correct.

 

I'm veering a little off topic here. But I had an Aunt who grew up in the 50's, 60's and hated "Safety Products" in automobiles. She literally use to cut her seatbelts out of her vehicles. She bought a brand new 1981 Celica, and one of the first things she did when she got it home was go out with a steak knife and cut the seatbelts out.

She grew up in a time when in her enviroment, women wore dresses and "nice" clothes and she hated the seatbelts because they "got in the way" and wrinkled clothes. And in her opinion if she wanted to take the risk of driving without them, she was going to take the risk.

Don't bother telling me she was wrong. I know. I argued with her for hours, I begged her NOT to cut her seatbelts out of her new vehicles. To no avail.

Eventually, she started to get very expensive tickets because she was NOT buckled up. I don't know what the Policeman must of thought when she was pulled over and would point out that she couldn't buckle up because she had no seatbelts. But after a few tickets even my Aunt retreated and I think she paid considerable money to have seatbelts re-installed in her Celica, and with future purchases she did stop cutting the seatbelts out.

This just reminded me of her, because that was part of her philosophy. She hated the idea of mandated, or imposed controls....even if they were beneficial to herself and everyone.

I simultaneously admired her rebelious viewpoint, even if I thought her arguements for not using seatbelts were totally illogical and invalid.

I can't imagine what she might think today. With navigation systems, VSC, anti-lock brakes and airbags. I think she grew up with the development of automobiles. She was used to a very primative product. Metal Dashboards, No Seatbelts, or Lap Belts only....nothing like airbags...warning chimes, or any of the standards we have today.

Before the Celica she owned a 1970's VW Bug. She hated Ralph Nader because of his "attack" on The Bug. Oddly, I think she liked the idea that her car was actually "not safe"....

For her, as far as safety advancement goes, less was more. If it was broke, call it fixed and drive on. She would of definently been with the OP of this thread in wondering where all the protect yourself from yourself was going to stop. The difference for her being, she was against some very basic and good advancements. I think with interfaces and Nav Units and warnings....we've gone a little far. But part of that of course is companies protecting themselves from legal liabilties.

I just got done reading the owners manual to my new car. They literally have to mention almost every concievable scenario and put a warning about every single thing in the manual. There are warnings about running out of gas (did you know it was possible and might leave you stranded?) There are warnings about checking your Tires (They are inflated and can be both over inflated....which can be bad...or under inflated...which can be bad.) .....and I like to imagine, in honor of my Aunt there is a big section on how to use the seatbelt(s). (You have to insert the belt, into the clasp until it clicks...who would of thought?)

It is pretty ridiculous. No wonder people don't read their manuals. There is useful information but it's buried in the pages and pages of the illumination of the idiot's obvious.

 

Of course Toyota designed the nav system...and the phone dialer as well....to not work while the car is in motion to protect: a. themselves from legal action; b. their customers; and c. innocent people in other cars or on sidewalks from being hurt while some Prius driver tried to work his nav system while driving a 2000 pound vehicle down the road at 40mph.

There wouldn't be a need for nanny state laws or safety features if human beings behaved in a rational manner at all times and all had superior hand/eye coordination and dexterity. Unfortunately, we don't.

 

You know that would make sense except other car manufacturers do let you use these expensive options while you drive. So Toyota's system = fail.