xapache

Maybe this has been suggested before but here goes.

I understand the whole argument about being distracted while driving and more importantly (for Infiniti) is being sued by a distracted driver. So they handicap some functions of the navigation system.

Oke, so why not use the same switch that senses when someone is sitting in the passenger seat which then activates or deactivates the passenger airbag. The concept would be, if you have a passenger then they are using the navigation while you are driving. In my family that is my wife's job.

Come on Infiniti, think outside of the box.

A_Palaroan

iTrader: (2)

true dat!!!

Chekov

That won’t work and Infiniti knows it. Any sort of weight placed on the passenger seat would fool the system, and I’m sure many drivers would do it.

Even my 75lb Golden Retriever activates the passenger seat belt light. I now have to strap him in, but he doesn’t know how to operate the nav.

Philip8969

I think they should just let everything work all the time. If a driver is stupid enough to allow themselves to get distracted it is their own fault and they shouldn't be able to sue anyone. Just my .02.

Chekov

How about if this driver hits another car head-on because of this distraction and wipes six people in the other car? Or worse yet, suppose you were in the other car?

BHB 91

iTrader: (3)

I agree. It should not be Nissan's fault if someone is careless enough not to pay attention to the road. Unfortunately we as a society have become to "sue happy" and try to blame others for our own screw ups. As a result, manufacturers of almost everything have to cover their a$$es so they won't get sued. Very sad if you ask me.

Chekov

I’ll never understand why this issue keeps coming up when all you have to do is use voice commands while driving with one flip of your thumb.

Philip8969

If I was in the other car I would sue the driver that hit me... not Nissan. That is like saying if I got hit by a driver that was texting I should sue Verizon.

xapache

Exactly my point as well.

On the dog issue, I'm not sure I would have my dog on my nice leather, but if I did then I bet Ceasar Milan could help train him to use his nose to program my GPS. All kidding aside, you are right I could use voice command but this is a $49k car not a Ford Fusion, although just because you can afford one doesn't make you anymore sensible.

Good discussion.

Chekov

Well, my point is who do you sue if you’re dead? And again, what about the other guy (we’ll call you the hitter and him the hitee)? Would he say, “You’ve just killed me and my family, so it will have to be my estate that sues, but that’s OK with me.”?

And I don’t know what having a $49k car has to do with it. Voice commands on the G are quite good, as one would expect in an upscale car. I challenge you do to the following: Put in a destination manually and time how long it takes. You'll have to do it while stopped, of course. Now do it again via voice commands. You may find the latter is faster. Furthermore, consider how long it took you to do the manual input. Let’s say it took 20 seconds. Now picture taking your eyes off the road for those 20 seconds at 70mph on a freeway or winding, dark road, and you may see my point.

As for my dog, I’ve had his nails clipped, and I’m teaching him to put in destinations manually. The problem is he only wants to input destinations to local butcher shops.

Philip8969

Haha I get your point Chekov. I just think at some point people are going to have to own up and take responsibility for their actions instead of blaming it on their cars. There are so many other distractions in the car I don't think it would make a difference anyway. For example, scrolling through the artists on my Ipod makes me take my eyes from the road... but that feature is not blocked. Which brings me back to the cell phone thing. If someone is texting while driving they are responsible for the wreck... not the phone company. It should be the same way with using features in the car IMO. One last example: if someone is drinking and driving I sue them, not the alcohol company. I guess my point really is you can't blame the company that makes a product if someone misuses it. The responsibility always rests with the operator.

Chekov

Philip8969,
I certainly agree with you regarding drivers taking responsibility for their actions. But I’m really making a different point, and that is we must consider the safety factor too. Regardless of who is at fault or to what degree Nissan is protecting itself from liability, manual inputs while driving can be risky and the cause of accidents, some of them deadly. And a good way to lower the potential for such mishaps is to maintain the lockout feature and use destination voice commands that IMO were designed for that purpose in the first place. It may be an annoyance for expert drivers, but not all G drivers throughout the country are in that class.

hispeed-lowdrag

iTrader: (7)

I disagree with Chekov about this issue (I think it should be available and if people are dumb enough to create a saftey hazard then we will see the Darwin Awards serve their purpose) but I do agree with him that the voice commands are MUCH easier/quicker than manual inputs.

Chekov

But there’s no requirement that one has to be smart to own a G37. Maybe there should be an intelligence test that dealers should give to prospective buyers. I can see it now, “Sir, you’re too stupid to own a G. Please try the Yugo dealer down the street.”

Once again, the point is there are many dim-witted drivers out there who can create a safety hazard, and the driving public needs to be protected somewhat so these poor drivers don’t kill us. Modern safety equipment that intelligent or skilled drivers may not always need is a response to this problem. Perhaps that’s the price we have to pay to stay alive on the road.

Philip8969

Chekov:
I understand your point about creating a safety hazard, but I am going to have to disagree with it. With that logic everything... and I mean everything should be locked out while driving. AC controls, audio controls, seat controls, bluetooth, cruise control, and voice commands are all somewhat distracting and therefore a safety hazard. On that note listening to music is also distracting. But, who wants to drive around in silence? My point is that I don't think manually programing the nav is any worse from a safety standpoint than using any of these other functions that are not locked out. It should be all or nothing IMO and I am an "all" type of guy. Personally I find it more distracting that when I go to do something it doesn't work. Makes me mad that someone wants to force me to operate my vehicle in a way I would otherwise choose not to.

I am glad we agree about people owning up to their actions tho!

As for the intelligence test thing... that's ridicules. But, I do think it is WAY to easy to get a drivers license in this country. I got mine when I was 16. I look back on that and I just think "wow I absolutely should not have been on the road then." That is, however, an entirely separate issue.