I'm surprised that GM's Onstar wasn't mentioned here, because out of all of the new technologies going into cars Onstar is probably the most impressive. The reason is that onstar isn't just a one trick pony that's cool, but doesn't really do something you couldn't already do anyways. Nav systems can be programmed, iPods can be wired to car audio (heck used to do it with the tape adapters). To me none of that is really innovative. I think GM hasn't exploited the full potential of onstar and with Sync coming out (and open after 2008) GM is going to have some trouble staying ahead. Sync for example, lets you stream data from your cell phone to your car. Why doesn't Onstar do that? (As far as I know you can't stream internet radio through Onstar) In Japan, cell phone network providers have worked hard to sell content from 3rd party providers. This model doesn't work well in the US because people don't commute much by public transportation. Yet people spend ever longer portions of their time in their vehicles. Imagine being able to stream podcasts to your vehicle for your morning commute. The possibilities are really endless when you have a good medium like Onstar and Sync.

It's because of my tech background that I see things like Navi and Command and OnStar and shake my head. Overpriced and not very useful. BMW gives you an aux connector with the car but if you want ipod/usb integration it's $500. Yikes! For a plugin and some basic software?! and onstar has a monthly service fee...which is laughable. Pay so you can ask where a gas station is? Come on. Ask the guy on the street for free!

Agreed bdc. While I love the idea of new technology, I hate the idea of poorly executed and overpriced technology (which, unfortunately, accounts for too much of it these days...).
 
The rapidly dropping price on certain items (Playstation 3s, iPhones) is a good sign that at least enough consumers share my views to force the makers into realistic price zones. The same should hold true for automotive technology -- we need it properly executed and properly priced, otherwise don't bother us with it.

That's why I think Sync is going to be a great technology. It's relatively cheap at $400 and no monthly fees. Some cars have floor mats as $100 options. I can finally put my pen drives to some good use. I'm a little biased because I work for Ford and I know what upgrades Ford will be introducing, but its the beginning of something big for the auto industry. Not just for Ford, but for everyone.

Agreed, o, it seems many of the latest entertainment technologies are meant to show customers that the car is cool, instead of actually being useful. I see why people might want navigation, an ipod or USB connection, Bluetooth and perhaps a built-in hard drive.......but who needs to stream data from their phone to their car? For what? Podcasts? Simply tune in to NPR.......
 
At the same time, I'm sometimes careful about criticising new technology that seems useless. Cellphone cameras came out not because consumers demanded them.....I was certainly against the idea.......but once in a loooong while they prove useful for me!

"Simply tune in to NPR....... "
 
Some of us prefer not to listen to National Proletariat Radio.
 
I agree with most of you guys on this one. I appreciate the level of engineering and ideas that go into these new toys, but I don't want to pay for them and many times distract from the real reason I am in the car.
 
I purposefully bought an Odyssey EXL because at the time you couldn't get the DVD in the Touring model without paying $2500 for the navigation system. Most of the time I know where I am going. I don't need a computer riding along with me for that kind of money. Think of how many times you will actually use this?
 
A good friend of mine just bought a 335i with iDrive. He has his presets programmed for destinations, phone numbers, radio stations, and iPod songs (or some such). It was a nice gimmick. But several times he had to wait until he got to a stop light so he could "show me" how cool this was. And it all cost him thousands of dollars more than one without the cool factor.

Sync has the potential to be a killer app.
 
I just get frustrated when I see a 35k G35 or 328 and it lacks navi by default. If Verizon can throw it in every phone, then good grief, manus should order in bulk for every model and put a simple 4 inch screen in dash of each car, with a Sirf Star III chip and some basic software. Bump the price $300 and people will think it's a screaming good deal. They'll still make money on it!!!!
 
The TomTom One is currently selling for under $200! (http://www.amazon.com/TomTom-Portable-Vehicle-Navigation-System/dp/B000H866BM/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/002-4152544-4484062?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1189803985&sr=8-2) They're not taking a loss on it either. $300 bump in pricing for an in-car navi seems totally reasonable.

NPR? To bore myself to death during commute? No, thank you. I would rather tune into Rush Limbaugh. Much more entertaining.

I'll second you on Limbaugh, STL.

Just for the record, I rarely listen to NPR! :) I just mentioned it because podcasts contain the same types of things that would be said on NPR, am I not right?
 
Inf act, I hardly listen to radio......I usually just play my MP3 CDs.....

This article and comments, coupled with the Fun to drive articles and comments from a few days ago shows the dichotomy in all of us.
 
Fun to drive is disappearing, cars are not as involving as they used to be. We want that back, and while you're at it could you please make my car a rolling infotainment center, complete with navigation, dvd, surround sound, cruise control, adaptive cruise control, iphone, internet streaming, auto parallel parking, rear view video cameras, lane change warnings, and the list goes on.
 
All we want is everything.

Nah, some of us can and do go without. My current car is a 2007 and its only luxury feature: xenon headlights. Otherwise, my cooper S has leatherette and the generic standard feature set, plus aluminum trim. Underneath the sport package and sport suspension are installed but those are hardly luxury/electronic entertainment aids.
 
Low-tech is the best way to describe my current car. If they offered a GPS built-in for $300 would I take it? Maybe. If it were detachable for sure.

Norm I agree somewhat with your sentiment that all we want is everything, but only somewhat. I for one, have no interest in surround sound (for listening the 2 channel audio?), Internet streaming (...Well maybe if it was free, and it was for doing something useful, but we know that's not going to happen), auto parallel parking, rear view video cameras, and lane change warnings. None of those features you mentioned require a reduction in the FTD factor, sans the minimal weight they add (if we ignore self parking mechanisms). At any rate, as much as I don't like to admit it, consumers wanting it both ways is what pushes the envelope ever further. It's how a FWD 4-cylinder can smoke a V8 muscle car of yesteryear in a straight line and through the corners, while using little over half the gas.

"its only luxury feature: xenon headlights"
 
Air conditioning, power brakes, power steering, power windows, power door locks, fm radio with CD player - Not long ago, all of these features were considered luxury items. Now, they are on the Mini as standard equipment.
 
Dichotomy R Us

I like the idea of being able to download music from CDs (or iPods) on to a built-in hard drive, like Chrysler's MyGIG.
 
I also like the idea of NAV systems being able to give out traffic—and weather alerts.

mnorm - I'd gladly surrender the air conditioning, power windows/door locks and radio. But going by your "short" time ago thing, fuel injection, airbags, IRS and 17 inch rims were rare standard equipment 25 years ago too. Imagine buying a car today without all of tha; instead we'll get: a solid beam axle, 15s and carburetor.
 
Power brakes and power steering I'll keep, thanks. My sister's 91 Miata lacked power steering and 3 point turns in that sucker were a bear.

Blueguy you'd surrender air conditioning? Me, no way!
 
Unless I'm buying a $13k car, I want air conditioning, power windows/locks, cruise control, a great stereo (surround is unnecessary and not worth it.........just something with radio reception and MP3 CD playback.....maybe an AUX terminal), ABS, all the airbags, and traction and stability control if well tuned. Unless I can't afford it, I wouldn't buy a car without these.
 
I could do without leather seats (although they look cool), moonroof, Sync and similar systems, cooled seats (I live in Texas and my standard seats work just fine), heated seats.....and navigation. I don't want sound deadening (what's the point of driving if I can't hear the engine?) or an automatic transmission!

I don't want to give up any of it. I even crossed over to an automatic transmission.
 
But we should recognize the contradiction most of us have: we want fun to drive, and a living room on wheels.

blackadder,
agree with most of your "do without" list, except the sound deadening. I could also do with out traction, stability control, and cruise control. I can't remember the last time I used cruise control.

LOL @ your last sentence, mnorm1. I am going to take a wild guess that blackadder will disagree with you.

LOL, LOL, Suby and mnorm. No comments about cruise control ;)

So to sum this up, despite all of us being enthusiasts to some degree, we all have very different opinions on what we want and don't in our cars. Clearly the solution is for the automakers to give us choice.

Yeah, bbechtel, I agree. Cars should be sold just like computers are sold on dell.com or hpshopping.com! That would be really sweet!

Haha, how crazy would that be? "Yeah I'm building a new car... braced and weight reduxed E36 chassis, E46 CSL motor, Quaife 3.42 rear with 1.5 way LSD, Audi dash, Nissan clutch, Honda Nav system, Eibach control arms, maybe a .70 6th gear to save on gas..."
 
Seriously though, a recent mechanical discovery with my bicycle made me question why cars can't be universal like bikes. Bikes prove that you and be standardized and still be ridiculously light or ridiculously off-roadable, fast or comfortable, or any combination of the four.

I guess the reason is that we all more or less want the same things on a bike.......and we have accepted that all bikes look the same. The nature of a bike also means that there is hardly any room for features!
 
On the other hand, we expect that cars look different to reflect our budget, personality, needs and sense of style.
 
Actually, customising a car like a computer is not an unusual idea. If you go to MSN Autos website, they have a customising system just like for a Dell or HP! The only difference is that, instead of sending that info to the factory, the website finds dealers in your area with a similarly equipped car. The problem: the choices (almost) always have features you don't want and lack features you need..... Just like buying a computer at Circuit City or Best Buy!
 
Given that computers and cars follow a similar assembly line process, I don't see why manufacturers can't make them customizable if the customer is willing to wait!
 
LOL! Maybe some independent small manufacturers could get different parts from different manufacturers and put them together!!! LOL! That would be the car enthusiast's paradise! "Yeah I'm building a new car... braced and weight reduxed E36 chassis, E46 CSL motor, Quaife 3.42 rear with 1.5 way LSD, Audi dash, Nissan clutch, Honda Nav system, Eibach control arms, maybe a .70 6th gear to save on gas..."