Author: Mr.Yu
In recent days, He XPeng’s new perspective has become popular again.
The specific event is that He XPeng said in a recent media interview that he “is more firmly opposed to having many screens in the car.” Specifically, He XPeng believes that “the basis for having many screens in the car is that there are many people in the car. However, the number of people and the proportion who need to use different screens in a car at any given time has little value in terms of input output ratio.”
As of the time of writing, the question on Zhihu has over 1.8 million views, nearly 900 followers, and large several thousand views visible speedily rising every few minutes.
In hundreds of replies, various senior predecessors have joined the discussion, and the conclusion is rarely in agreement from various perspectives, partially or wholly approved.
Perhaps feeling unsatisfied, or perhaps feeling that He XPeng’s words contain hints, everyone has intentionally or unintentionally associated it with the Ideal L9 released last month. Moreover, media colleagues have interpreted Nextquarter’s upcoming Xpeng G9 in connection with the Ideal L9 as a direct competitor, thinking that He XPeng’s remarks are not naming names.
What He XPeng said ≠ What everyone understands
Is He XPeng targeting the Ideal L9 released last month?
Assuming that what He XPeng said is to directly denigrate the Ideal L9, we can analyze it accordingly. According to Ideal Automotive’s “Five-screen three-dimensional space” promotion, there are not only the intuitive interpretation of the central control screen, co-pilot entertainment screen, and rear cabin entertainment screen, but also the HUD that boldly replaces the instrument panel, and the safety driving interaction screen on the steering wheel.
He XPeng’s original words were about the “input-output ratio.” Since the instrument panel has been firmly replaced by the HUD and the safety driving interaction screen, and the central control screen is almost a standard configuration of any intelligent car now, the most valuable discussion is on the co-pilot entertainment screen and the rear cabin entertainment screen.
Let us return to the macro level.
Who is the central control screen for? The driver, or the driver and the co-pilot. Because it covers daily driving behavior, the most comprehensive information output and comprehensive control functions are concentrated on the central control screen.Who is the passenger screen for? It is basically for the co-driver. It could be a partner, an older child or a friend. After all, daily commuting and family travel is not the Dakar Rally, and the co-driver is not a navigator and does not need to communicate constantly with the driver while looking at the roadbook. In fact, there is not much significance for co-drivers to participate in driving behavior. If the co-driver is not chatting with the driver all the time, whether they look at the screen or the phone behaviorally, there is no difference at all.
Some vehicles that use three-screen or ultra-long-screen designs, such as the Ford EVOS and the BAIC Arcfox Alpha S, will try to involve the co-driver in the driving behavior. For example, the co-driver can plan navigation routes on their own side of the screen, and then share the navigation interface to the central control screen through designated interactive gestures. Or directly control the content played by the in-car speaker.
Perhaps someone would say that watching videos or playing games on the passenger entertainment screen in a public environment would disturb the driver. Sorry, many vehicles equipped with co-driver entertainment screens can be connected to Bluetooth headphones for separate output. For example, the first model of the HiPhi-X from the luxury technology-oriented Gaohe can emphasize the immersive experience of co-driver entertainment by designing a clear separation between the 19.9-inch large screen and the driving space, fixing the co-driver’s view at a lower position.
This is what He XPeng calls screen utilization.
Who is the rear entertainment screen for? Family members of all ages or friends who cannot participate in driving behavior as passengers. Whether it’s watching streaming video, connecting a gaming console to play games, or plugging in a microphone to turn it into a mobile KTV, it provides more choices for everyone, rather than letting smartphones or dozing off become the only choices.
Those who think that children do not need to be taken care of during family travel must have never experienced the helplessness they bring to elderly fathers and mothers during the explosive stage of energy and curiosity.
In a series of deep user surveys targeting smart car owners, a user raised the issue that “in-car entertainment is derived from the home living room scenario, not to make the cabin learn from the living room.” Whether it’s the most suitable horizontal screen for entertainment, or the more suitable vertical screen for interaction, the central control screen is clearly not suitable for overly complex and longer operations, let alone interactive games that are disconnected from external devices.
Let’s make another analogy. For the function of singing karaoke in the car, many people find it strange and even sneer at it. Originally, the K song entertainment, which was strongly associated with social attributes and space privacy, looks somewhat socially awkward whether it is parked in an open-air parking lot or speeding on a highway.
Also in the user survey, when we launched the microphone last September, a NIO owner who purchased it at the first time told us that the frequency of using in-car KTV is low, ranging from once a month to once every two months. But this user is still very satisfied and believes that it is an additional healthy entertainment way to share with children.
This is not an isolated case. Nearly half of the users expressed similar desires: It may not be used frequently, but you must have it.
He XPeng said that too many screens are a waste, which is correct. If various brands cannot find the actual scenario, screens will become a disguised premium, and users will pay for product managers’ arrogance. On the other hand, when the automakers show demands that can be put into practice in the scenario rather than fragmented functions or gimmicks, more screens bring users more possibilities.
Ultimately, the screen is only the carrier of the system and ecosystem and is the terminal of the scenario and demand.
In the vast majority of cases, human thinking is not only a single thread, and more than one thing is being considered in the brain. Similarly, it does not mean that car manufacturers and suppliers are not focusing on the core business of “making cars” in the intelligent cabin and user scenarios.
Many people like to use mobile phones as an analogy. During the era of function phones, we could only use phones for voice or simple text communication, so phone manufacturers competed in design, conveyed value, and chatted about identity recognition.
Later, mobile phones have faster networks, larger and better screens, stronger imaging and recording functions, and even AI algorithms to help users reduce the threshold for taking good photos. The hardware and configuration upgrades are one aspect, and the core is still the developers who continue to iterate through applications and functions to bring better experiences to users.
Hardware is just a piece of wood in the effect of wooden bucket, what really determines how much water this bucket can hold is software, experience, scenario, insight and understanding.
Let’s think further, when fully autonomous driving has become popular and getting into a car is only for pure moving behavior, what do you want to do in the car?
If it were me, I would say I want to do whatever I want.
Final thoughts
I remember last year when I was conducting the review “Intelligent Cockpit Intelligence Bureau | Moving Mouths, Never Moving Hands – XPeng P7”, I was still marveling at the geekcar fatty:
“Sitting in this car feels magical. Whether it’s the two-tone recognition configuration or the better front space, the front and back of this car give completely different feelings. Take a look at the top-notch intelligent voice, as well as the styling design, this car is probably aimed at young singles or unmarried couples?”
Even considering the different positioning of the car, my opinion still hasn’t changed today. The reason why this topic arose because of He XPeng’s views, there is actually no absolute right or wrong. For the needs and pain points of others, we can only try to empathize with them and try to understand them.
Finally, I want to end with a small story that I haven’t used in a long time.
After graduating from college and starting work, PC games were still my core entertainment, especially fast-paced first-person shooter games. In order to expand my perception and improve my “combat” efficiency, I decided to buy a better gaming headset.
After comparing and researching for nearly a month, I spent 200 yuan “a huge amount of money” to buy an entry-level product from a certain Nordic peripheral brand on Taobao. Apart from being a bit tight on the head, I was quite satisfied overall. That was also the first time I had encountered this new online shopping method on Taobao.
During lunch with my colleagues, I talked about the shopping experience, but was directly mocked, “Are you stupid?” “Why don’t you just go to the store in Zhongguancun?”
With the discomfort of being mocked, I calculated for him:
The most economical and convenient way of transportation is to take the subway, and the round trip is also over two hours;
I won’t go alone, I have to bring a friend, and since I’m bringing someone along, I should at least treat them to lunch;
The offline price is at least 50 yuan more expensive than online, and it’s still difficult to bargain down the price.After calculating all the costs, it is almost twice as expensive to purchase compared to buying on Taobao, not to mention the time cost.
The colleagues were speechless.
The history of the Chinese internet seems to always be accompanied by controversy: phone users have the Android versus Apple debate, gamers have the genuine versus pirated game debate; car enthusiasts have the fuel versus new energy debate, and within the cabin there is the traditional versus intelligent debate.
In most cases, we often find it difficult and reluctant to put ourselves into specific situations, instead we use our familiar inertia thinking and behavioral patterns to judge the rationality of others’ behavior.
Perhaps someone would say that understanding users is the job of a product manager, not mine.
It’s not wrong. As a last resort, the value of deciding product design for users is not the head of a company, nor the media, nor is it the glib internet commenters, but the users’ own needs and choices.
The biggest freedom for adults is not right or wrong, but having choices.
This article is a translation by ChatGPT of a Chinese report from 42HOW. If you have any questions about it, please email bd@42how.com.