The most annoying thing is that carmakers didn’t move to touchscreen-only because people want it,

They definitely wanted it at first, or at least, they wanted the “new shiny tech” in their cars.

They first added screens for things that are appropriate to show on screens, like GPS maps. But that's not going "touchscreen-only." Touchscreen-only -- putting everything on the touchscreen, whether it was an appropriate interface for it or not -- was purely a cost-cutting move.

I disagree. I knew touchscreen controls on a vehicle sucked as soon as I encountered them. Sticking my hand out to reach for the heater slider/knob that was always in the same place, always there, and gave immediate real feedback of the real world is better.

It feels dangerous to use lcd touchscreens while the car is moving.

Yeah. There are two kinds of 'want' to consider really - one being what sells cars, and the other being what people actually enjoy using.

Nice clean interiors with huge full-console touchscreens look modern and have that wow-factor that impresses in the showroom, and that's what matters as far as getting a purchase.

So yeah, you're right that people do want it, but only until they've had to live with it for a while.

I think because most buyers have never been in this position before, they aren't considering what the driving experience would be of not having those controls. They assume and trust that the manufacturers will make sensible design decisions and that the car will first and foremost function well and intuitively as a vehicle, because that's the whole point of a car, right?

We have lived through many decades of car controls getting better and more intuitive all the time, so people would naturally assume the manufacturers know what they are doing. And then only now suddenly get slapped in the face by changes that make the experience actually worse for the driver.

My Peugeot e208 has both of them parallel to each other and that was the main reason i decided for that car instead of something like a tesla.

There is no way i'll be tapping through some iOS like app interface to change the temperature while going 150km/h on the highway...

More options are always the optimal solution for the consumer, though in this particular case I'd say they don't necessarily need to have exactly one physical button and one touch screen button for each thing. Mostly just the things that a driver is most likely to toggle on the road.

It's not unusual for cars to have a couple different ways to control things. Like how the volume control on the sound system can be on the dash but also behind the steering wheel.

But again, doubles of every single function is probably overkill.

Exactly. Touchscreen can be a positive because you get dynamic and contextual menus, and the sort of rich user interface that people expect from modern devices.

But for the most common functions, nothing beats the tactile muscle memory of physical controls that are always immediately present when you need them, and can use with your eyes still on the road.

So the best is to have both.

A radio needs to be able to do two things: Rotate for volume and press for muting.

A dial button is not that hard to implement.
Plus it can work as a on/off switch.

Thank you. That seems more reasonable. E.g. the key principle being a strict seperation between safety/general car control and functions like entertainment, both in the user interface and in the computer/routing between interface and physical realisation.

Yes

And the insane thing is that some (most? All?) models with it don’t light the brake lights when slowing!

Can you do an emergency break with one pedal driving? I don’t think so