Acura MDX SUV Forums banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
After spending my first week in my new 2017 MDX, I can confidently say that the Nav system is possibly the worst tech I have ever experienced in a car. Slow, cumbersome and buggy. Several steps to enter an address with dual screens and an audible system that frankly is worthless. Both the wife and I have already reverted to Waze...on an over $50,000 car. Pitiful Acura! Caveat emptor.

...at least the vehicle other than the Nav/infotainment is really nice so far.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,339 Posts
Yeah Acura/Honda NAVs aren´t the best...
I have the outdated system in my 07 and MANN that thing is crunchy and useless... My Tom Tom GO600 has been the best upgrade done to the MDX hahaha.
The only thing good that the NAV is good for is to have the screen for everything else, Otherwise I wish the car could start directly into Audio and not the NAV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
391 Posts
After spending my first week in my new 2017 MDX, I can confidently say that the Nav system is possibly the worst tech I have ever experienced in a car. Slow, cumbersome and buggy. Several steps to enter an address with dual screens and an audible system that frankly is worthless. Both the wife and I have already reverted to Waze...on an over $50,000 car. Pitiful Acura! Caveat emptor.

...at least the vehicle other than the Nav/infotainment is really nice so far.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
I dont mind the navi at all. Once you change some of the routing options, etc I dont have any issues with it. I never expect in-car systems to work as well as a dedicated hand-held either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
391 Posts
I dont mind the navi at all. Once you change some of the routing options, etc I dont have any issues with it. I never expect in-car systems to work as well as a dedicated hand-held either.
right. hand-held all the way. i mean...you are paying a monthly premium to use the cell phone services anyway (indirect cost to you). so why shed out more on Acura's traffic service?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
right. hand-held all the way. i mean...you are paying a monthly premium to use the cell phone services anyway (indirect cost to you). so why shed out more on Acura's traffic service?


Im talking about the non-subscribed basic Nav system. I would prefer to use it over my Waze if it worked, but it requires multiple entry steps and the voice recognition is close to useless. If Y'all like yours or your handhelds, good on ya. As for me, I was hoping for more out of my MDX. I guess there was a reason they wanted the salesman to demo it rather than let me spend more time with it. My fault.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,799 Posts
Honda and it's backwards ways... upgrading the non-luxury side first while the "luxury" side has to live with old tech. Ironic since luxury segment is where new tech matters more!

Btw vic, can you tell me what software version and maps version your 2017 is running now? Is it ver 5.x software?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Honda and it's backwards ways... upgrading the non-luxury side first while the "luxury" side has to live with old tech. Ironic since luxury segment is where new tech matters more!

Btw vic, can you tell me what software version and maps version your 2017 is running now? Is it ver 5.x software?
I'll check and get back with you. Just took delivery a few days ago and car was built on 8/16.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
I have an '09 MDX and considering trading up to a '17 Advance MDX. I use the Nav in my '09 all the time. Simply knowing where you are in a city (even one you are familiar with) is nice. I usually navigate by pointing to the place on the screen I want to go to and it calculates a path very nicely. Entering addresses is a pain. I understand I can give it an address with voice recognition in the '17. Are you saying the voice recognition doesn't work well? It works fine on making phone calls on my '09. What is the problem?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Phone commands work great. It seems to fall apart when entering an address or even worse when trying to name a business. My I-Phone does it simply in one step with verbal queues. Why can't my car come even close? All I can suggest is spend a great deal of time with it while test driving the car. The dealer had my salesman sit in the driver seat for the demo and did not let me take the wheel until 5 miles from the dealership. Hindsight I think this is all a planned approach. HE did all the nav demo and quickly moved on to other features. My bad for not exploring more myself but, regrettably, I thought in an Acura level vehicle it had to be better than good. It is not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
You can also send the car addresses via the Acuralink app.

Siri works great for various commands, the voice recognition not so much lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Phone commands work great. It seems to fall apart when entering an address or even worse when trying to name a business. My I-Phone does it simply in one step with verbal queues. Why can't my car come even close?
Not to defend car companies, because I agree generally speaking the infotainment tech is atrocious, but I have an understanding of both automotive development and modern software development, so, since you asked... :grin:

The first, and briefest, answer is: R&D dollars. I honestly don't know how much has been invested in developing Apple's voice recognition tech, but based on the age and the maturity level, and with the limited knowledge I have about how Apple does things, I wouldn't be surprised if it was well over $4 billion at this point (just in the research and processing tech, not even counting the infrastructure to support/run it). There is no way -- NO WAY -- Acura or any other car company has come close to that level of investment in their voice tech. Some are starting to wake up that this needs to be corrected, because, as you point out, such pitiful tech performance on a big-ticket item like a car isn't acceptable to most consumers. But they're lagging behind the times.

So why don't they license someone else's tech? Well, many car companies do. But the answer is the same -- nowhere near the level of investment that Apple or Google have.

The second reason it's not as good: processing power. Your iPhone, as insanely powerful as it is, isn't actually processing your speech. Not fully, anyway. It's transmitting a digital version of what you say up into "the cloud" -- an Apple datacenter with cast arrays of insanely powerful computers that are specifically optimized to process speech. It's fast enough that it can do things like parallel contextual processing: if you say words "A B C", and it first misinterprets word "B" as "E", when you say word "C", it will realize that what it thought was "E" is probably "B" because that makes more sense. And it does that dozens or hundreds of times, in parallel, in fractions of a second. Your car, of course, processes everything locally, and probably is lacking advanced processing of that nature. And it doesn't have a very fast processor. (See how laggy it is just moving from screen to screen.)

Third reason: development lifecycle. As some people are aware, cars have very long development lifecycles. The computer hardware and software that's in your 2016 MDX was primarily designed/developed in 2011/2012. That's an age and a half in this world where we're used to annual iPhone upgrades and software updates that can roll out every month. And because a car is arguably a more critical system than your phone, manufacturers are loathe to do lots of frequent changes (not that most of them have the network infrastructure to do frequent updates in the first place). If Apple releases a buggy piece of software on your phone, your calendar alerts might not work. If Acura releases software with unintended side effects for your car, something much more serious could happen.

I'm not saying those are *good* reasons, but those are the reasons that generally car tech is vastly inferior to the tech in our pockets and on the web. This can all be addressed, but only recently are some car companies starting to wake up to the fact that they need to understand how to develop user-facing software (not just embedded systems software).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
391 Posts
Not to defend car companies, because I agree generally speaking the infotainment tech is atrocious, but I have an understanding of both automotive development and modern software development, so, since you asked... :grin:

The first, and briefest, answer is: R&D dollars. I honestly don't know how much has been invested in developing Apple's voice recognition tech, but based on the age and the maturity level, and with the limited knowledge I have about how Apple does things, I wouldn't be surprised if it was well over $4 billion at this point (just in the research and processing tech, not even counting the infrastructure to support/run it). There is no way -- NO WAY -- Acura or any other car company has come close to that level of investment in their voice tech. Some are starting to wake up that this needs to be corrected, because, as you point out, such pitiful tech performance on a big-ticket item like a car isn't acceptable to most consumers. But they're lagging behind the times.

So why don't they license someone else's tech? Well, many car companies do. But the answer is the same -- nowhere near the level of investment that Apple or Google have.

The second reason it's not as good: processing power. Your iPhone, as insanely powerful as it is, isn't actually processing your speech. Not fully, anyway. It's transmitting a digital version of what you say up into "the cloud" -- an Apple datacenter with cast arrays of insanely powerful computers that are specifically optimized to process speech. It's fast enough that it can do things like parallel contextual processing: if you say words "A B C", and it first misinterprets word "B" as "E", when you say word "C", it will realize that what it thought was "E" is probably "B" because that makes more sense. And it does that dozens or hundreds of times, in parallel, in fractions of a second. Your car, of course, processes everything locally, and probably is lacking advanced processing of that nature. And it doesn't have a very fast processor. (See how laggy it is just moving from screen to screen.)

Third reason: development lifecycle. As some people are aware, cars have very long development lifecycles. The computer hardware and software that's in your 2016 MDX was primarily designed/developed in 2011/2012. That's an age and a half in this world where we're used to annual iPhone upgrades and software updates that can roll out every month. And because a car is arguably a more critical system than your phone, manufacturers are loathe to do lots of frequent changes (not that most of them have the network infrastructure to do frequent updates in the first place). If Apple releases a buggy piece of software on your phone, your calendar alerts might not work. If Acura releases software with unintended side effects for your car, something much more serious could happen.

I'm not saying those are *good* reasons, but those are the reasons that generally car tech is vastly inferior to the tech in our pockets and on the web. This can all be addressed, but only recently are some car companies starting to wake up to the fact that they need to understand how to develop user-facing software (not just embedded systems software).

i wouldnt be surprised if this wasnt truly the case with car manufactures.

I think Ford was the first that implemented M$' automated services to their infotainment systems on consumer level cars. Now you have MB adding outside services to their dash.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
I just don't get why they don't put more emphasis on infotech - it's the hot-button thing on vehicles right now. It seems like tech is what is selling cars and this is not helping Acura's case. I have a 16 Mercedes C-Class (redesigned in 2015, so very new model) and the infotainment is an absolute treat, not perfect but highly functional, very smooth and aesthetically pleasing. The Nav portion of it is amazing - by far best built-in Nav I've seen, even in Canada where most GPS providers have less detailed maps, etc. Even the voice recognition works amazingly well, even when pronouncing full street names it's very accurate.

The Acura one is sluggish, performs poorly and is ugly to boot... I agree that it is a huge miss...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
I have a 16 Mercedes C-Class (redesigned in 2015, so very new model) and the infotainment is an absolute treat, not perfect but highly functional, very smooth and aesthetically pleasing. The Nav portion of it is amazing - by far best built-in Nav I've seen, even in Canada where most GPS providers have less detailed maps, etc. Even the voice recognition works amazingly well, even when pronouncing full street names it's very accurate.

The Acura one is sluggish, performs poorly and is ugly to boot... I agree that it is a huge miss...
This is what i'm saying. It can be done; in fact my Ford Sync was WAY better. Ford mind you. There really is no excuse why the Acura is as bad as it is. Their is an explanation, but no excuse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,614 Posts
Yeah Acura/Honda NAVs aren´t the best...
I have the outdated system in my 07 and MANN that thing is crunchy and useless... My Tom Tom GO600 has been the best upgrade done to the MDX hahaha.
The only thing good that the NAV is good for is to have the screen for everything else, Otherwise I wish the car could start directly into Audio and not the NAV.
I have a Garmin. Includes a dashcam.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,339 Posts
How does it perform? I wonder due to the location of the GPS mounting position how well is the angle to work as a Dashcam? at least here in Cali you cannot mount a GPS in the middle of the windshield only to the sides.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
I just went from a 2011 MDX to the 2017. On the 2011, the nav traffic service was through XM Radio and we paid a monthly fee. Now, the nav traffic is handled (I think) through AcuraLink and is controlled by the FM radio. Whenever the traffic didn't show up for a period of time, I could call Sirius/XM and they would "reboot" the system for me. It seems that AcuraLink can't do that and I have had really inconsistent performance of traffic status on my new car. I can drive for a few miles before it kicks in. Anyone else having that problem?
Thanks.
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top