I would like for Mazda to implement on board internet for future Mazda 6's. This type of vehicle is refered to as a "connected car".

Other companies are already doing this:
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...584101521.html

Among the companies doing this are:

- BMW AG
- Daimler AG
- Fiat Chrysler Automobiles
- Ford Motor Company
- General Motors Co.
- Honda Motor Co.
- Tesla
- Toyota Motor Corporation
- Volkswagen Group
- Volvo

Notice that Mazda is not on this list

82% of all cars shipped in 2021 are expected to be connected.
Automotive Industry Trends: IoT Connected Smart Cars & Vehicles - Business Insider

Mazda, please start integrating onboard internet to make your vehicles connected.

 

It's a CAR. You're supposed to drive it. Check your Facecrap posts at home.

 

I knew a post like this was coming. I am surprised it was so soon though. It is a rather naive assumption if one truly believes surfing the web and "checking facecrap" is the intention of a connected car.

I personally have no intention of checking email, Facebook or texting when I am driving. Ever. It should not be done by me or anyone else while driving a vehicle. Ever. Doing these things is unsafe and should be completely disabled while the vehicle is in motion. I hope that in the future, technologies come about that do disable the very unsafe practices done by a significant number of people (performing various tasks on ones phone while driving).

Barring unsafe practices that should be banned/disabled while the vehicle is in motion (such as surfing the web, checking emails, texting etc.) some of the advantages of a "connected car" are:

- vehicles interact with each other while coordinating with the road infrastructure like the traffic signals, ultimately improving safety, improving ETA times in Navigation apps and assist in upcoming self driving technologies
- They can instantly alert drivers behind of encountering an unsafe road hazard such as an ice patch
- More connected cars means more accurate and instant traffic conditions without needing user input
- connected cars can help avoid collisions by notifying the driver of a vehicle that is a few vehicles ahead of the driver and is not seen but has slammed on his brakes or has had a collision

This is probably the biggest one and it sounds like this is a biggie to the poster above
- Having connected cars will make it so drivers do not mess with their phones while driving and everyone is much safer because of it

- Driving/Navigation apps such as Google maps can be seen on the center console accessed from the steering wheel instead of ones phone improving safety
- Driving alerts, such as "cop spotted ahead, road hazard ahead, car parked on shoulder ahead" in apps like Waze would also be seen on the center console and accessed from the steering wheel, not ones phone like what is often done now
- Having a connected car will allow it to be a hotspot for all passengers in your vehicle

The list goes on

No, a "connected car" does not mean "checking facecrap". Its much much more.

Again, Mazda, for improved safety for all of us (and for various other good reasons such as was listed above) please follow suite of a growing number of other auto manufacturers and implement "connected car" technologies in future versions of your vehicles.

Thank you.

 

When using a phone the problem is eyes focused on information on the screen, hands functioning information on the screen, mind focused on information on the screen. It doesn't matter if its on a phone screen with the phone in your hand or a dash mounted screen with the wheel in your hand, its still distracting your eyes, hands and mind from the primary task of driving so its the same problem just a different symptom like using heroin to get off meth, you've still got the same problems you just externalise through a different symptom. But if its an onboard system supplied with the car then its the companies fault not the driver, right?. Every new invention removes an ability or construct of the mind making the process of driving less safe because drivers are less alert when more is done for them. (If you have 'staff' you never learn to look after yourself) for over 100 years no one needed auto lights, auto wipers, cruise control, park sensors, auto park or navigation. Even automatic gears cause problems on ice, the whole time you are not braking the car is driving so you have to lock the wheels causing a skid instead of using the brake and gears to brake the engine avoiding the wheels locking, watch those videos of cars on ice and you see the brake lights on and the wheels locked because they are driving an automatic. But learning to use a stick shift is just an inposition to the lazy minded driver. The number of accidents is going up or staying consistent, not reducing. Why does anyone want driverless technology? Other than laziness or incapability i see no need for it, only a want by lazy idiots. Just because it is available it doesn't mean you need it. Yet again heroin is readily available but you don't need it until you have had it, then you can't function without it. When you lose your job to technology you will be upset but your more than happy to lose your ability to function to technology... Really?

Every driver needs to be aware of their surroundings, road conditions, size of vehicle and able to control it in all situations or in reality they are not able to drive anyway. We have to work in terms of the weakest link in certain situations and while there are people who set it to cruise and get in the back we need as few aids as possible to make driving safer for everyone driving, riding, walking and even sitting in the front room if you've ever seen a car crash into a building. Its tons of metal that can kill not a comfortable armchair for having fun playing a driving game. If the driver is alert and undistracted while in control of the vehicle there is no issue. This voids all your claims of safety... What happens when the digital system fails if you cant drive an anologue car? Even if the dangerous functions are disabled in terms of the onboard system then the driver can just use the hot spot to connect a device that can use those functions again making it less safe.If all the internet functions are disabled then how is any passenger going to use the internet functions?

The ETA can not be changed so knowing it acurately is insignificant, if you only find out the ETA once driving then all you could do is leave earlier, unless your driving a delorean with marty mcfly this is not possible and no amount of on board technology will improve your time management. Cop ahead doesn't matter, if your legal you have no fear of cops anywhere so don't encourage bad driving or illegal acts then make claims of safety. What about hacking? You might argue that currently they are unhackable but its only a matter of time before someone works out a way. There's already ways but the company won't promote/reveal that fact. (check the dark web) the people who made it know how to get into it, one disgruntled ex-employee and well... Then you can't drive your car until a patch is released or worse you lose control of the car because its been hacked while in motion.

You'll only know if a car has crashed ahead if it is a connected car... If connected cars are so safe why will it have crashed? If its not a connected car then a person in a connected car will have to use their onboard system to input the information while they are meant to be concentrating on driving, not sending text messages about road conditions, but if text is disabled they won't be able to input the information anyway... If drivers become unable to drive or navigate then how will they overide a malfunction? How will they know the car isn't taking them a longer route costing more in fuel, maintenance and creating more pollution? (Even electric cars require power stations to create electric so even electric cars doing more miles creates more pollution)

Keyless theft will be easier, if your car is stolen and found all locked up then you won't be able to claim it was stolen because it appears you moved it and parked it elsewhere. If you still have the key and its all locked up with no damage to the ignition how can you claim it as stolen? You are then labeled a criminal making false reports to fraudulently claim on insurance or avoid a driving offence such as being caught on a speed camera. (I saw a police show today where a drunk driver who crashed his car through a fence into a field was caught by this evidence. Having reported his car stolen, it was locked up, no ignition damage and he still had the key, thus, it wasn't stolen) This all reduces safety and will increase insurance costs (you do want hacking cover right? Oh and hacking in motion cover? What about system failure cover?) Wants over needs, you dont need a connected car you want one, but you only want it to be connected in the ways you want... The world doesn't revolve around you. I'm not afraid of the future or clinging to the past but new doesn't mean improved, it just means different from the old. If you want a connected car and 82% will be then don't pick one of the 18% that arent, it's simple unless you have blind brand loyalty, but if the brand isn't loyal to your wants as a customer then your loyalty is misguided and you can blame the company for losing you as a customer. I'm sure they'll find a replacement customer from all the people who don't want to be forced into a connected car by their current chosen brand. Competition through choice is the key to modern business, its not meant to be a homogenised monopoly of no choice at all, whats the point in branding if every car is the same? If every car is the same then why chose mazda? Then whats the point in the company that produces 'car' putting any effort into its product when every piece of crap is as crap as the next? All you will do is buy 'car'

So in short... Its a senseless arguement of brand choice when your talking about removing any difference between brands. your point defeats itself before you make it.

 

Barkingbill . . . . well said.