Another Touchscreen Downside - 2010 Mitsubishi Outlander GT Long-Term Road Test

2010 Mitsubishi Outlander Long Term Road Test

2010 Mitsubishi Outlander GT: Another Touchscreen Downside

September 24, 2010

outlander nav screeen glare.jpg

Okay, I readily admit that this photo isn't the best, but that's sorta the point. Touchscreens must be quite exposed to be touchable, and this means that they're much more susceptible to picking up sunlight than the alternative of deeply-hooded remote-controlled displays.

So touchscreens wash out in direct light. They also reflect said light into your eyes. Rather, my eyes, as I shielded them from what you see above for a good chunk of my commute this morning. They're not as obnoxious as this, however.

Other reasons touchscreeens suck:

- They look all ganky with fingerprints. Sure, buttons would be just as ganky, but at least I don't have to have a constant visual reminder of their gankiness.

- Since they necessarily must be within reach and are of a certain size, they influence/force the layout of the entire dashboard, and not always for the better. Another side effect of their closeness is that they force a greater focal adjustment than a set-back screen.

-They don't always register your touches. You sometimes have to do a double- or triple-touch.

- But the fact that you must take your eyes off the road and watch your finger touch the desired part of the screen for every command is absolutely the worst aspect. There's simply no way to operate the controls of a touchscreen by feel.

This last point could be said of non-touchscreen displays as well, but in practice it seems they allow quicker/shorter glances than touchscreens. Of course, I could be wrong. It happened once before.

Jason Kavanagh, Engineering Editor

Leave a Comment

Past Long-Term Road Tests

Have a question? We're here to help!
Chat online with us
Email us at
*Available daily 8AM-5PM Pacific
Call us at 855-782-4711
Text us at ED411