>It's odd that they promote their product by saying that phone use while driving is unsafe. I fail to see who this is significantly safer than using a phone, since to use the HUD one needs to necessarily remove their attention and focus from the road and redirect it to a small point much closer to their face.
The thing is, jet fighter pilots use HUDs. If those work for them, I'm pretty sure it's ok for a car too.
Plus the road is quite boring site most of the time. You are not always in fast traffic or streets full of pedestrians. If you leave in Nevada, close to Highway-50 even more so, but I digress.
This must be a joke...have you met the average driver? Compared to fighter pilots, who are the best of the best and have years of specialized training plus millions of dollars of military-grade hardware devoted to giving them situational awareness of all possible threats?
Jet fighters pilot are (amongst other things) selected on their multitasking skills. Plus they have extensive training regarding concentration, reaction time and so on. You cannot really compare them to the average driver.
Yeah, and average drivers don't face even 1/10 of the speeds and situations a jet fighter pilot faces, including the G's.
Things I didn't say but people still replied as I said them: a) that jet fighters and car drivers have the same skills, b) that jet fighters tweet.
My comment was plain and simple. To rephrase: if HUDs work in such quick-response situations, in a vehicle with 100 times the complexity of your average car, 10 times the speed, and missiles against you, then sure the "average driver" can look at a HUD to see a new tweet, if he doesn't have to de-focus from the road with this technology.
The thing is, jet fighter pilots use HUDs. If those work for them, I'm pretty sure it's ok for a car too.
Plus the road is quite boring site most of the time. You are not always in fast traffic or streets full of pedestrians. If you leave in Nevada, close to Highway-50 even more so, but I digress.