Dragon Drive is the best car voice activation system we’ve spoken to

Finally, a system you can interrupt.

Read the whole story

 

[mcmnky]

Deekin[/url]":1fqy4oq6]Of course, we could just ignore all the gizmonics and just pay attention to driving the car instead of talking at it.

[ohwaityoureserious.png]

 

[ben.hocking]

Deekin[/url]":dmbrrxlm]Of course, we could just ignore all the gizmonics and just pay attention to driving the car instead of talking at it.

FTFA:

Not using a phone at all in the car is obviously the ideal solution, but like teenagers and sex, hoping for abstinence is a high-minded but ultimately ineffective approach.

 

[peragrin]

I expect in another 5 or 6 years we might get an infotainment system that is actually has a useable interface to use while driving.

 

[BigDXLT]

A voice system we can interrupt?


About.


Damn.


Time.

 

[Nekojin]

carcharoth[/url]":2v27vqa0]"most of us intrinsically know that playing with our phones isn't compatible with piloting a vehicle surrounded by other vehicles and pedestrians"

you lost me in the first paragraph.

i completely disagree, this is like saying you cannot learn to do anything simultaneously, like shift a car while driving, or hold a conversation with a passenger

practice makes perfect

No offense, but you're an idiot if you truly believe this. It's been shown conclusively through multiple studies that talking on a cell phone is a marked increase in risk - splitting your attention makes it much more likely that you'll be distracted when you have an event that requires split-second reactions. Texting is even worse... that's been determined to be more hazardous than drunk driving.

If you think that you can split your attention better through practice, you're fooling yourself, and creating an unnecessary hazard for yourself and everyone around you. Using a stick shift isn't even remotely the same thing - that's a simple action that requires no attention away from your forward view. Communication - whether you're talking on the phone or texting - is anything but "simple." It takes a significant portion of your brain power. Even carrying on a serious conversation (something unrelated to the driving itself) with someone else who is in the car can be enough of a distraction to increase your risks unreasonably.

 

[jimCA]

Amazing. From what I recall from being tangentially involved with them, 10+ years ago this was considered a normal and near necessary feature for voice driven customer service systems. I have to consider this a safety feature for the reasons laid out in the article. There's simply no reason a nav system needs to be a distraction.

 

[greatn]

Nice.

Here's my typical use case in my Accent.

BEEP. "Please say a command" BEEP.

Call Parents.

"Calling Puh Rints, on mobile? at home?" BEEP

On mobile

"Calling Puh Rints, on mobile. Say yes to proceed." BEEP

Yes

"Calling. beedeebeedeebeedeebeedeebebop"

Call connects, "Hello?" I hear nothing. Wait two seconds. "Hello?" "Oh hi, I didn't hear you at first."

It's dreadful.

Glad someone is doing something about it.

 

[mcmnky]

carcharoth[/url]":2djk2yfq]"most of us intrinsically know that playing with our phones isn't compatible with piloting a vehicle surrounded by other vehicles and pedestrians"

you lost me in the first paragraph.

i completely disagree, this is like saying you cannot learn to do anything simultaneously, like shift a car while driving, or hold a conversation with a passenger

practice makes perfect

How do you plan to learn to look at your phone and the road simultaneously?

 

[Ravant]

Can we all just take a moment to talk about how glorious that name is, though? Dragon Drive? It's like you've learned how to train your very own dragon and are reaping the benefits.

 

[momurda]

carcharoth[/url]":36ga8hk9]"most of us intrinsically know that playing with our phones isn't compatible with piloting a vehicle surrounded by other vehicles and pedestrians"

you lost me in the first paragraph.

i completely disagree, this is like saying you cannot learn to do anything simultaneously, like shift a car while driving, or hold a conversation with a passenger

practice makes perfect

If you text and drive, you will kill somebody. And you will end up in jail. Then you can reminisce about how good you are at multitasking while you spend half a dozen years in prison. All because you couldnt wait five minutes to see what someone texted to you.

 

[mmiller7]

greatn[/url]":xdcusg88]Nice.

Here's my typical use case in my Accent.

BEEP. "Please say a command" BEEP.

Call Parents.

"Calling Puh Rints, on mobile? at home?" BEEP

On mobile

"Calling Puh Rints, on mobile. Say yes to proceed." BEEP

Yes

"Calling. beedeebeedeebeedeebeedeebebop"

Call connects, "Hello?" I hear nothing. Wait two seconds. "Hello?" "Oh hi, I didn't hear you at first."

It's dreadful.

Glad someone is doing something about it.

Wait, yours actually recognizes what you say?

My Subaru has a "Premium Harman Kardon" sound system and as best I understand can only dial from the phone book you program (by voice) into the radio.

Typical call goes something like this:
1. Press "Call" on steering wheel
2. wait for menu
3. Press "Talk", say "Dial by number"
4. Press "Talk", say "Confirm"
5. wait for menu
6. Press "Talk", read the number
7. listen to it read back what it thinks I said, usually missing a few digits because it's hard to compare digits and placement in a slow readout while driving, or it messed something up.
8. Press cancel, repeat steps 1-7 a couple times
9a. If I'm really lucky, it got it right and I can press talk and say "Confirm"
10. Press off-hook and wait for the call to dial
11. look for the phone because it's taking an awful long time and I'm wondering if it actually worked
12. Inevitably it will go to voicemail or something, and I have to call a different number.


9b / 12. Pick up the phone and use speed-dial to call with one hand while driving with the other, press "send" on the phone and then it initiates the call from the phone end in about 2 seconds instead of playing stupid games with the hands free system. Call goes thru and it just works.

 

[nkrisc]

carcharoth[/url]":246kc0et]"most of us intrinsically know that playing with our phones isn't compatible with piloting a vehicle surrounded by other vehicles and pedestrians"

you lost me in the first paragraph.

i completely disagree, this is like saying you cannot learn to do anything simultaneously, like shift a car while driving, or hold a conversation with a passenger

practice makes perfect

You're a danger to everyone around you and you should stop driving.

 

[Kommet]

Did Ars consider perhaps not prominently displaying the Stephanies' phone numbers in the video?

 

[Dr Gitlin]

carcharoth[/url]":396d1ysg]"most of us intrinsically know that playing with our phones isn't compatible with piloting a vehicle surrounded by other vehicles and pedestrians"

you lost me in the first paragraph.

i completely disagree, this is like saying you cannot learn to do anything simultaneously, like shift a car while driving, or hold a conversation with a passenger

practice makes perfect

Yeah, science disagrees with you: http://meincmagazine.com/science/2010/03/ ... phone-use/

 

[ivantod]

Ravant[/url]":1hjwyk2d]Can we all just take a moment to talk about how glorious that name is, though? Dragon Drive? It's like you've learned how to train your very own dragon and are reaping the benefits.

Dragon is a bit of a well known name in speech recognition technology, even since the 1970s and the later "Dragon Naturally Speaking" speech recognition software for PCs.

Here two links with a bit of history (mostly focusing on how the company basically went bankrupt around 2000 and the ensuing court case):

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/busin ... .html?_r=0

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/01/24/ ... -headache/

 

[mmiller7]

carcharoth[/url]":uhmeowok]"most of us intrinsically know that playing with our phones isn't compatible with piloting a vehicle surrounded by other vehicles and pedestrians"

you lost me in the first paragraph.

i completely disagree, this is like saying you cannot learn to do anything simultaneously, like shift a car while driving, or hold a conversation with a passenger

practice makes perfect

Part of that learning is the part where you realize you do a better job if you focus on driving.

That means...
-you may miss a call if you are in a situation requiring more attentiveness. That's what voicemail is for.
-you may abruptly stop talking and ignore a call (or your passengers) if a situation develops that requires more attention.
-you may have to hang up on someone if you tell them you are driving and have to go because you need to pay more attention.
-texts are unimportant. If they actually need something now, they could call (see point 1)
-if you're that OCD about texts in real time, get an app which reads them aloud so you don't have to look away. That still doesn't mean you can sit there typing out a reply driving though. I don't trust the voice-dictation replies so I just don't use them.

Everyone I know who I talk to is totally understanding if I have to ignore them when I get back to them and say I was driving.

 

[UnnDunn]

Kommet[/url]":1x5a6fib]Did Ars consider perhaps not prominently displaying the Stephanies' phone numbers in the video?

Fairly sure the names displayed in the video are demo names and numbers.

 

[jaffy]

Not using a phone at all in the car is obviously the ideal solution, but like teenagers and sex, hoping for abstinence is a high-minded but ultimately ineffective approach. If people are going to text and drive—which they are—then systems that make that a safer activity are probably a good thing.

I'd agree that we can't completely eliminate texting and driving, but stiffer penalties and enforcement would almost certainly reduce it. This is like saying we'll never completely eliminate drunk driving, so we should do nothing. Texting while driving has been shown to be more dangerous than drunk driving, so I'm not sure why the penalties aren't at least as severe.

 

[Drizzt321]

BigDXLT[/url]":ybct4h1j]A voice system we can interrupt?


About.


Damn.


Time.

I agree. This seems like a voice system I'd actually enjoy using. Get out of my way and just let me get to what I want to do!

 

[Golgo1]

jaffy[/url]":r6o3h80z]

Not using a phone at all in the car is obviously the ideal solution, but like teenagers and sex, hoping for abstinence is a high-minded but ultimately ineffective approach. If people are going to text and drive—which they are—then systems that make that a safer activity are probably a good thing.

I'd agree that we can't completely eliminate texting and driving, but stiffer penalties and enforcement would almost certainly reduce it. This is like saying we'll never completely eliminate drunk driving, so we should do nothing. Texting while driving has been shown to be more dangerous than drunk driving, so I'm not sure why the penalties aren't at least as severe.

I'm not advocating irresponsible driving, but I submit an answer to your question.

Drunk driving can be, and must be, proven in order to charge/convict someone.

Texting has a much MUCH lower bar to reach. If the officer thinks he saw you touch your phone, you're guilty.
Then it is up to you to somehow convince the traffic judge that you were not touching your phone. No, text logs do not help, because contrary to the PR announcements, texting is irrelevant. You touched your phone, therefore you were 'distracted'
Local anecdote, an elderly couple got fined for txt while driving. Turns out they don't own, and have never used a cell phone. They offered to have the officer search the car. Too bad, ticket anyway.
They took it to court (and the media).. too bad, pay the fine. WTF, are you kidding?

The only way I want to see harsher penalties is with a much stricter duty for proof.
We have enough laws that can ruin a life without much evidence or oversight

 

[Ravant]

ivantod[/url]":xh5nhmzv]

Ravant[/url]":xh5nhmzv]Can we all just take a moment to talk about how glorious that name is, though? Dragon Drive? It's like you've learned how to train your very own dragon and are reaping the benefits.

Dragon is a bit of a well known name in speech recognition technology, even since the 1970s and the later "Dragon Naturally Speaking" speech recognition software for PCs.

Here two links with a bit of history (mostly focusing on how the company basically went bankrupt around 2000 and the ensuing court case):

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/busin ... .html?_r=0

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/01/24/ ... -headache/

Oh, I'm aware, that doesn't change the fact that the alliteration of the name and the images it conjures are awesome.

 

[Eurynom0s]

Nekojin[/url]":1ovspgt8]

carcharoth[/url]":1ovspgt8]"most of us intrinsically know that playing with our phones isn't compatible with piloting a vehicle surrounded by other vehicles and pedestrians"

you lost me in the first paragraph.

i completely disagree, this is like saying you cannot learn to do anything simultaneously, like shift a car while driving, or hold a conversation with a passenger

practice makes perfect

No offense, but you're an idiot if you truly believe this. It's been shown conclusively through multiple studies that talking on a cell phone is a marked increase in risk - splitting your attention makes it much more likely that you'll be distracted when you have an event that requires split-second reactions. Texting is even worse... that's been determined to be more hazardous than drunk driving.

If you think that you can split your attention better through practice, you're fooling yourself, and creating an unnecessary hazard for yourself and everyone around you. Using a stick shift isn't even remotely the same thing - that's a simple action that requires no attention away from your forward view. Communication - whether you're talking on the phone or texting - is anything but "simple." It takes a significant portion of your brain power. Even carrying on a serious conversation (something unrelated to the driving itself) with someone else who is in the car can be enough of a distraction to increase your risks unreasonably.

From what I recall reading, the big reason that talking to someone on the phone (regardless of what hands-free tech it has) is so much worse than talking to someone in the car with you is that someone in the car with you can see when things are getting a little hairy and know to shut up for a minute and let you deal with it in a way that someone on the phone can't know unless you have to put in the further mental effort of telling them to shut up for a moment.

 

[UnnDunn]

Golgo1[/url]":1p84cnjd]

jaffy[/url]":1p84cnjd]

Not using a phone at all in the car is obviously the ideal solution, but like teenagers and sex, hoping for abstinence is a high-minded but ultimately ineffective approach. If people are going to text and drive—which they are—then systems that make that a safer activity are probably a good thing.

I'd agree that we can't completely eliminate texting and driving, but stiffer penalties and enforcement would almost certainly reduce it. This is like saying we'll never completely eliminate drunk driving, so we should do nothing. Texting while driving has been shown to be more dangerous than drunk driving, so I'm not sure why the penalties aren't at least as severe.

I'm not advocating irresponsible driving, but I submit an answer to your question.

Drunk driving can be, and must be, proven in order to charge/convict someone.

Texting has a much MUCH lower bar to reach. If the officer thinks he saw you touch your phone, you're guilty.
Then it is up to you to somehow convince the traffic judge that you were not touching your phone. No, text logs do not help, because contrary to the PR announcements, texting is irrelevant. You touched your phone, therefore you were 'distracted'

Yes, exactly. It doesn't matter what specific activity you're performing on your phone; merely interacting with it means you must divert some measure of your attention away from driving, for no good reason.

 

[colinrichardson]

Deekin[/url]":37hbeuev]Of course, we could just ignore all the gizmonics and just pay attention to driving the car instead of talking at it.

Ken M., is that you?

 

[remydlc]

Great to see the future infortaiment systems are going to get better. I love BMWs, too bad i have kids now, and i am driving my last one until im older. #priorities.

 

[omniron]

Still seems mediocre... wouldn't be surprised if Google/Apple car already eclipses this.

 

[QuarterSwede]

CarPlay/Siri does all of that except allow you to interrupt it which is the biggest feature they offer and one Apple really must implement. [Edit] Added enhancement request in iOS feedback app for Siri.

If I say "call Jennie at home" it calls Jennifer on our house phone (just tried it to make sure). If I say "take me to Circle K gas station" it routes me to the nearest Circe K. BMW is not the first with most of this. Not that that matters but he said it enough times.

 

[reckless76]

I don't understand why car manufacturers are investing so much money into this. Why not just implement Android Auto/Car Play and be done with it? Is it just product differentiation? Is having the best crappy system really that important?

 

[Gyrator]

QuarterSwede[/url]":g3oan6vj]CarPlay/Siri does all of that except allow you to interrupt it which is the biggest feature they offer and one Apple really must implement. [Edit] Added enhancement request in iOS feedback app for Siri.

If I say "call Jennie at home" it calls Jennifer on our house phone (just tried it to make sure). If I say "take me to Circle K gas station" it routes me to the nearest Circe K. BMW is not the first with most of this. Not that that matters but he said it enough times.

Cortana with a Bluetooth sync to my Lexus does all of this *and* lets me interrupt the system. First tap of the voice command button on the steering wheel starts the voice prompt, second tap shuts it up so I can speak my command.

Honestly, until this article I didn't know being able to interrupt the voice prompts was so rare, I just assumed they all worked this way.

 

[mehaase]

This looks nicer than most of the locked-in, non-upgrades me software in modern cars, but it's still locked-in, non-upgradeable software. As cars implement general purpose computing, users need more control over what software runs in their car and also need the ability to upgrade, in order to fix bugs and patch vulnerabilities without visiting a dealer.

So... Nuance in the car is neat, but ultimately not much better for the consumer.

 

[Dr Gitlin]

reckless76[/url]":3a58dzdl]I don't understand why car manufacturers are investing so much money into this. Why not just implement Android Auto/Car Play and be done with it? Is it just product differentiation? Is having the best crappy system really that important?

Neither Android Auto nor CarPlay have their hooks into the car itself, just your phone. And as I wrote in the article, Nuance's voice recognition appears in my testing to be a lot more competent than Siri.

In my experience of CarPlay so far it's actually quite underwhelming, but I'm extremely curious to see what Ron makes of it in his big review that's coming very soon.

 

[jdale]

I don't think I will use it until all the processing is local, but it's nice to see the UI improving.

 

[bsharp]

BigDXLT[/url]":40dw9ulz]A voice system we can interrupt?


About.


Damn.


Time.

I can interrupt the entune voice commands on my 2016 toyota tacoma.

 

[Golgo1]

UnnDunn[/url]":2wug5wa4]

Golgo1[/url]":2wug5wa4]

jaffy[/url]":2wug5wa4]

Not using a phone at all in the car is obviously the ideal solution, but like teenagers and sex, hoping for abstinence is a high-minded but ultimately ineffective approach. If people are going to text and drive—which they are—then systems that make that a safer activity are probably a good thing.

I'd agree that we can't completely eliminate texting and driving, but stiffer penalties and enforcement would almost certainly reduce it. This is like saying we'll never completely eliminate drunk driving, so we should do nothing. Texting while driving has been shown to be more dangerous than drunk driving, so I'm not sure why the penalties aren't at least as severe.

I'm not advocating irresponsible driving, but I submit an answer to your question.

Drunk driving can be, and must be, proven in order to charge/convict someone.

Texting has a much MUCH lower bar to reach. If the officer thinks he saw you touch your phone, you're guilty.
Then it is up to you to somehow convince the traffic judge that you were not touching your phone. No, text logs do not help, because contrary to the PR announcements, texting is irrelevant. You touched your phone, therefore you were 'distracted'

Yes, exactly. It doesn't matter what specific activity you're performing on your phone; merely interacting with it means you must divert some measure of your attention away from driving, for no good reason.

While I understand the basis of that argument (which I realize is not yours, personally), I reject it for a number of consistency reasons
1- If it is not about texting, don't call it a texting law and go around PR-ing to people that you've implemented anti-texting laws (again, not you I mean the lawyers/politicians )
2- If it is not specifically about texting, weren't there already plenty of laws and penalties in place already -for decades- to handle people operating vehicles dangerously?
2-If any distraction is dangerous and illegal and we must be protected from ourselves, why are radios, passengers, food, billboards, etc legal? Why doesn't every single distraction have its own, dedicated law and associated fine?

Again, I do not support dangerous/distracted driving, but I have never seen a need for these laws. They are redundant and blatantly political.

 

[MikeSafari]

Dr Gitlin[/url]":161hrwf1]

reckless76[/url]":161hrwf1]I don't understand why car manufacturers are investing so much money into this. Why not just implement Android Auto/Car Play and be done with it? Is it just product differentiation? Is having the best crappy system really that important?

Neither Android Auto nor CarPlay have their hooks into the car itself, just your phone. And as I wrote in the article, Nuance's voice recognition appears in my testing to be a lot more competent than Siri.

In my experience of CarPlay so far it's actually quite underwhelming, but I'm extremely curious to see what Ron makes of it in his big review that's coming very soon.

Is Ron reviewing Android Auto as well, or just CarPlay? I'm in the market for a new car and the new Honda Civic is really pulling my eye because of its Android Auto support, but I still haven't seen a proper review of it from a place I trust.

 

[Hopefully Smarter]

I was curious as to why we hadn't heard from Nuance in this space until now. Of course, someone is going to have to buy me the BMW

 

[D-Coder]

Golgo1[/url]":2pvx1v79]

UnnDunn[/url]":2pvx1v79]

Golgo1[/url]":2pvx1v79]

jaffy[/url]":2pvx1v79]

Not using a phone at all in the car is obviously the ideal solution, but like teenagers and sex, hoping for abstinence is a high-minded but ultimately ineffective approach. If people are going to text and drive—which they are—then systems that make that a safer activity are probably a good thing.

I'd agree that we can't completely eliminate texting and driving, but stiffer penalties and enforcement would almost certainly reduce it. This is like saying we'll never completely eliminate drunk driving, so we should do nothing. Texting while driving has been shown to be more dangerous than drunk driving, so I'm not sure why the penalties aren't at least as severe.

I'm not advocating irresponsible driving, but I submit an answer to your question.

Drunk driving can be, and must be, proven in order to charge/convict someone.

Texting has a much MUCH lower bar to reach. If the officer thinks he saw you touch your phone, you're guilty.
Then it is up to you to somehow convince the traffic judge that you were not touching your phone. No, text logs do not help, because contrary to the PR announcements, texting is irrelevant. You touched your phone, therefore you were 'distracted'

Yes, exactly. It doesn't matter what specific activity you're performing on your phone; merely interacting with it means you must divert some measure of your attention away from driving, for no good reason.

While I understand the basis of that argument (which I realize is not yours, personally), I reject it for a number of consistency reasons
1- If it is not about texting, don't call it a texting law and go around PR-ing to people that you've implemented anti-texting laws (again, not you I mean the lawyers/politicians )
2- If it is not specifically about texting, weren't there already plenty of laws and penalties in place already -for decades- to handle people operating vehicles dangerously?
2-If any distraction is dangerous and illegal and we must be protected from ourselves, why are radios, passengers, food, billboards, etc legal? Why doesn't every single distraction have its own, dedicated law and associated fine?

Again, I do not support dangerous/distracted driving, but I have never seen a need for these laws. They are redundant and blatantly political.

Some things are more distracting than others. In particular, things that require interaction with another person require more mental attention, and things that require interaction with another person who is not present require even more mental attention to "fill in" the other person's invisible body language, mental state etc.