2013 dodge durango uconnect® 130s/res
Captain
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 627
Likes: 2
From: Over Here, HI
The IPhone won't send text messages thru Uconnect or send Uconnect notifications on incoming messages. This is due them not supporting MAP for outgoing messages. As for incoming messages, they don't support an "out folder" which is needed in order for Uconnect to read the message. Apple has known about this for a few years and refuses to do anything about it and Uconnect won't change their strategy because it could cause issues with all the phones that it does work with.
Captain
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 627
Likes: 2
From: Over Here, HI
The NTSA wants drivers to keep their mind and eyes on the road for safety reasons. Hands free are supposed to be a simple system for people to use. If a person is trying to send a lengthy text to someone, their (at least most people) mind isn't on their driving. There are people that should not be driving at all while on a phone. This is why there is a generic list of 20 simple replies for texting.
Not to mention the speech to text features like SIRI or GOOGLE, they hardly get a complete sentence correct and you have to be holding the phone to see if what it's going to send is actually what you said and your eyes are off the road and your driving. It's all about safety for you as well as those around you.
Not to mention the speech to text features like SIRI or GOOGLE, they hardly get a complete sentence correct and you have to be holding the phone to see if what it's going to send is actually what you said and your eyes are off the road and your driving. It's all about safety for you as well as those around you.
They don't display, they're read - text to voice. There's a chart here http://www.dodge.com/download/pdf/Ph...y_Document.pdf
that shows the 4S wasn't compatible for SMS features. There's another site
http://chrysler.servigistics.com/que...uest_locale=en
That will allow you to select radio type, vehicle, phone manufacturer and phone model and for the 5S and RBZ all the features work except for USB Media (play, browse, album art) and anything text related.
You aren't missing much. It reads the texts pretty horribly and can't interpret any speech by users unless it matches 20 preset messages like "LOL" "I Love You" and so on. Very few if any phones can make use of all the features with these specific radios. Certain 2014 and 2013 model cars and trucks (durangos aren't on that list) can use a subscription service called Uconnect Access which will provide voice recognition and send custom texts like Siri or Google Now do for free.
that shows the 4S wasn't compatible for SMS features. There's another site
http://chrysler.servigistics.com/que...uest_locale=en
That will allow you to select radio type, vehicle, phone manufacturer and phone model and for the 5S and RBZ all the features work except for USB Media (play, browse, album art) and anything text related.
You aren't missing much. It reads the texts pretty horribly and can't interpret any speech by users unless it matches 20 preset messages like "LOL" "I Love You" and so on. Very few if any phones can make use of all the features with these specific radios. Certain 2014 and 2013 model cars and trucks (durangos aren't on that list) can use a subscription service called Uconnect Access which will provide voice recognition and send custom texts like Siri or Google Now do for free.
Amateur
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
The NTSA wants drivers to keep their mind and eyes on the road for safety reasons. Hands free are supposed to be a simple system for people to use. If a person is trying to send a lengthy text to someone, their (at least most people) mind isn't on their driving. There are people that should not be driving at all while on a phone. This is why there is a generic list of 20 simple replies for texting.
Not to mention the speech to text features like SIRI or GOOGLE, they hardly get a complete sentence correct and you have to be holding the phone to see if what it's going to send is actually what you said and your eyes are off the road and your driving. It's all about safety for you as well as those around you.
Not to mention the speech to text features like SIRI or GOOGLE, they hardly get a complete sentence correct and you have to be holding the phone to see if what it's going to send is actually what you said and your eyes are off the road and your driving. It's all about safety for you as well as those around you.
I go through more confirmations and repeated commands with their "simple" system than I do with Google Now, which is very accurate for me. Samsung's S Voice is even more accurate.
I'm sure it is hard for automakers to determine where to draw the line between offering tech hungry consumers the features they desire while limiting the potential distractions but that is not why we have limited Voice Recognition (VR). The exclusion of VR has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with these radio units being legacy systems (aka old crap). That's why many new Dodge and Chrysler vehicles can include a newer radio system that will do all the custom VR that Google Now does for free for a price, it's called UConnect Access. VR can be performed on device or on the backend. Internet access is required for the backend and processing power is required for it to be done on the device itself. The current OEM auto radio/entertainment system market requires that even down market systems have apps (Spotify, Pandora, Web Browsers) that use internet access which is supplied via WIFI or 4G cellular link, and so now UConnect includes VR on the backend for a subscription price.
Captain
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 627
Likes: 2
From: Over Here, HI
While there are paid feature services, they can also be considered a driver distraction. I understand that you may be better at multitasking in a vehicle but this doesn't mean that everyone is. There are people that shouldn't be driving with any kind of electronic gadgets including a radio. I'm sure that you've been behind someone going 40 or so on a hwy where the speed limit is 70 mph or even seen someone aimlessly roll on over into a lane cutting off another driver only to see that the person is on a cellphone when you pass them.
We hear all the time about a person killed or injured by a distracted driver. You can be distracted in several ways from cellphone usage to eating a burger. I had a lady almost hit me the other day as she pulled out of a Burger King. She was trying to unwrap her burger, had a cellphone on her shoulder and obviously driving with her knees. She pulled out of the driveway, passed the thru the first lane and into the second lane where I was, luckily I saw her ahead of the maneuver.
In Troy MI, the law considers eating or even drinking (coffee, soda etc) driver distraction and depending on the officer, can write you a nice little ticket.
The following information has been taken from a website that I get emails / reports from:
Driver Distraction and Regulation
There are three main types of distraction: visual, manual and cognitive. Many of the multi-tasking activities performed by drivers fall into multiple categories of distraction. As an increasing amount of functions are adapted to the automobile and become part of the driver experience, the importance of the human-machine-interface also increases. That said, there is some debate as to whether or not consumers truly crave quantity in terms of functionality. Does a driver truly want the ability to check in on social media while driving
or would having access to an improved smart search for the area around the destination be more desirable? The automotive industry and regulators are trying hard to research and develop guidelines which allow for and encourage
technological innovation while also improving road safety by minimizing distraction. IQPC asked several of our expert contacts to weigh in on driver distraction, safety and regulatory guidelines.
We need to gain a better understanding of driver behavior while driving
and more importantly, a much better understanding of the reaction and
adaptation that result from changes to vehicle HMI – especially
restrictions to use. Without that foundation of knowledge, we will find
this a frustrating and mercurial endeavor – forever chasing a goal that we
did not properly define at the outset….Well intentioned safety advocates
are proposing theories about cognitive distraction, however the
measurement techniques they use often don’t appear to be reliable and
repeatable. That suggests that we need to start by proving the reliability
and repeatability of the measurement techniques, then assure that the
measurements correlate to on-the-road performance. When that has been
established, then we can begin to evaluate different HMIs on a more
scientific basis, with a more realistic understanding of the effects specific
HMI attributes have on driver performance.
--Jay Joseph, American Honda Motor Company
Gestures and touch as they pertain to touch screens will be more
important than freehand gestures, mainly because freehand gestures
lack the feedback provided by contact, which is critical when visual
feedback must be limited so drivers can concentrate on looking at
the road. Speech will continue to be a niche application until
recognition improves, standard vocabularies emerge, and methods to
predict driver performance with speech interfaces are developed.
--Paul Green, Research Professor and Leader of the Driver Interface
Group at the University of Michigan Transportation Research
Institute
In the U.S., the NHTSA has been involved in researching and working on a set of guidelines for design meant to minimize driver distraction which largely followed guidelines adopted by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. There is however, some debate over certain aspects of the guideline and some experts believe it will hurt user experience and possibly affect safety negatively. Chris Schreiner of Strategy Analytics gave us some insight into what is planned for the next phases of the NHTSA guideline:
The NHTSA plans on releasing Phase 2 guidelines by the end of this
year, though it will likely be delayed until 2015. These guidelines will
cover carried-in devices which include aftermarket radios as well as
Apple CarPlay, Mirrorlink, and the result of Google’s Open
Automotive Alliance. They will be based largely on the Phase 1
guidelines although additional restrictive guidelines cannot be ruled
out.
Phase 3 guidelines are supposed to cover speech recognition, but will
likely not be released until 2016, if ever. Naturalistic data clearly
demonstrating the crash risk of speech recognition is necessary to
determine if guidelines for speech are even necessary, and that data is
not likely to be released until next year.
We hear all the time about a person killed or injured by a distracted driver. You can be distracted in several ways from cellphone usage to eating a burger. I had a lady almost hit me the other day as she pulled out of a Burger King. She was trying to unwrap her burger, had a cellphone on her shoulder and obviously driving with her knees. She pulled out of the driveway, passed the thru the first lane and into the second lane where I was, luckily I saw her ahead of the maneuver.
In Troy MI, the law considers eating or even drinking (coffee, soda etc) driver distraction and depending on the officer, can write you a nice little ticket.
The following information has been taken from a website that I get emails / reports from:
Driver Distraction and Regulation
There are three main types of distraction: visual, manual and cognitive. Many of the multi-tasking activities performed by drivers fall into multiple categories of distraction. As an increasing amount of functions are adapted to the automobile and become part of the driver experience, the importance of the human-machine-interface also increases. That said, there is some debate as to whether or not consumers truly crave quantity in terms of functionality. Does a driver truly want the ability to check in on social media while driving
or would having access to an improved smart search for the area around the destination be more desirable? The automotive industry and regulators are trying hard to research and develop guidelines which allow for and encourage
technological innovation while also improving road safety by minimizing distraction. IQPC asked several of our expert contacts to weigh in on driver distraction, safety and regulatory guidelines.
We need to gain a better understanding of driver behavior while driving
and more importantly, a much better understanding of the reaction and
adaptation that result from changes to vehicle HMI – especially
restrictions to use. Without that foundation of knowledge, we will find
this a frustrating and mercurial endeavor – forever chasing a goal that we
did not properly define at the outset….Well intentioned safety advocates
are proposing theories about cognitive distraction, however the
measurement techniques they use often don’t appear to be reliable and
repeatable. That suggests that we need to start by proving the reliability
and repeatability of the measurement techniques, then assure that the
measurements correlate to on-the-road performance. When that has been
established, then we can begin to evaluate different HMIs on a more
scientific basis, with a more realistic understanding of the effects specific
HMI attributes have on driver performance.
--Jay Joseph, American Honda Motor Company
Gestures and touch as they pertain to touch screens will be more
important than freehand gestures, mainly because freehand gestures
lack the feedback provided by contact, which is critical when visual
feedback must be limited so drivers can concentrate on looking at
the road. Speech will continue to be a niche application until
recognition improves, standard vocabularies emerge, and methods to
predict driver performance with speech interfaces are developed.
--Paul Green, Research Professor and Leader of the Driver Interface
Group at the University of Michigan Transportation Research
Institute
In the U.S., the NHTSA has been involved in researching and working on a set of guidelines for design meant to minimize driver distraction which largely followed guidelines adopted by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. There is however, some debate over certain aspects of the guideline and some experts believe it will hurt user experience and possibly affect safety negatively. Chris Schreiner of Strategy Analytics gave us some insight into what is planned for the next phases of the NHTSA guideline:
The NHTSA plans on releasing Phase 2 guidelines by the end of this
year, though it will likely be delayed until 2015. These guidelines will
cover carried-in devices which include aftermarket radios as well as
Apple CarPlay, Mirrorlink, and the result of Google’s Open
Automotive Alliance. They will be based largely on the Phase 1
guidelines although additional restrictive guidelines cannot be ruled
out.
Phase 3 guidelines are supposed to cover speech recognition, but will
likely not be released until 2016, if ever. Naturalistic data clearly
demonstrating the crash risk of speech recognition is necessary to
determine if guidelines for speech are even necessary, and that data is
not likely to be released until next year.
Amateur
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Great information XS. I'm looking forward to standards being setup and implemented. If there were hard standards in line with federal laws or guidelines we'd likely see all phone manufacturers and OEM radio suppliers on the same page with protocol implementations and wouldn't have to address these complex matrices to find out whether or not we can copy a music file to our car's hard drive. Good VR is no more a distraction than having a conversation with another passenger. Terrible VR is probably about as bad as texting by hand while you drive.
Some of the comments regarding recognition by the Michigan Transportation Research Institute are dated. All VR systems are not created equal and many are ready for primetime.
Some of the comments regarding recognition by the Michigan Transportation Research Institute are dated. All VR systems are not created equal and many are ready for primetime.
