So when is too much control in an interface a bad thing? When are having too many functions available in an interface just too much for the average user?

Well I know BMW has gotten their share of criticism lately for their iDrive UI in their vehicles but I had no idea just how many functions within that system were adjustable. Apparently almost every facet of the vehicle is adjustable…radio stations, rain sensors, gearbox, horsepower, tire sensors, light sensors, seat adjustment, active cruise, traction control, etc., etc. There’s been a fair share of automobile journalists a bit overwhelmed with the BMW system and I imagine the same response is evoked in certain vehicle buyers.

This reminds me of what happens in traditional software UI design when you turn a design solely over to engineers. As Alan Cooper has illustrated in his books, engineers don’t think like normal people, they always prefer more controls over less controls, expert systems over simpler systems, and generally add more and more functionality into a system until we have feature creep on a grand scale, not to mention reduced usability. Not to criticize engineers too much, because they couldn’t do the amazing things they do if their minds worked any other way. But as for design by engineers, why is the horsepower even adjustable in the first place in the BMW M5? Which brings me back to the point. When is too much freedom, too many options and functionality, in the user experience a bad thing?

Robert Farago over at The Truth About Cars thinks automotive manufacturers are already at the point of too much. He points out how, contrary to popular opinion, the vast majority of consumers share similar likes and dislikes. He illustrates his point with the myriad number of options available to BMW M5 (pictured) buyers. While there are a few us hardy folks who would enjoy programming the vehicle’s suspension, shifting, e-tracs, horsepower and gearbox options (there are 279 combinations), the average buyer will either use the default options or seek a less complicated car.

Farago suggests automakers go against the grain and–gasp!–lessen consumer choice of features. This includes designing said features with fewer settings (i.e., heated seats are just On/Off). The consumer will then enjoy driving their car, not be frustrated trying to remember which submenu contains the volume control for the ninth audio speaker in the third row of seating of the ‘Don’t-Call-It-A-Van’ grand tourer/people mover.

As much as purple dinosaurs would have us believe otherwise, most humans share the same likes and dislikes. Put an Audi MMI interface in front of a wealthy, middle-aged man, and he’ll use it (or not) the same way as any other wealthy, middle-aged man: completely ignoring 80% of its functions. If middle-aged men are your core clientele, confronting them with options they don’t want or (worse) understand is an indisputably boneheaded idea.

Robert Farago’s Article >>