All valid points. Though, I also have the Apple Watch since a few week and I traveled a couple thousands km with it while driving both in the city as well as in the highway, both at normal speed in Austria and Italy as well as at very high speed in Germany.
In my experience glancing messages and notifications is comparable but a bit more annoying and time consuming then glancing stuff on the navigation screen which in my case is situated right next to the tachometer between the two sits as in most modern cars.
As soon as you start operating the watch with your fingers, it gets dangerous quickly. It is a combination of factors. First, you need to tilt one wrist while removing the other hand from the wheel altogether making your feeling for the road a lot less precise. Second, you are looking "sideways" which distracts my orientation a bit more then operating the car screen which is perfectly perpendicular to the street. Third, the level of attention needed to read something on the screen, the physical action of tilting and/or raising and its reliability and the time it takes for the screen to activate make and then for me to read.
All in all I found that if I am driving 100 Kmh on a 2 lane highway everything is fine but if I am at double that speed, I can still glance the main screen and operate the car control safely, but I should restrain from using the watch altogether, except for quick glances, which usually account to nothing more that checking which app did come up with a notification but not reading it.
While driving in the city I also feel that it is not really safe to operate the phone except at traffic lights.
Regarding siri, I use it a lot to type messages, while driving, but rarely to operate my watch as most of what I need is better done through the car integrated controls as I can operate the audio player from my driving wheel for example.
I think this law is just overstepping because some people can function relatively safe while checking a text message. I know when it's not safe and I put the phone down.
Almost everybody thinks that they are a better driver and less distractable than they actually are. That suggests we shouldn't leave the question of whether an individual driver can function safely up to that driver. The texts can wait. Until the past few years, people mostly lived without them. Astonishing, I know.
You're still ignoring the other distractions that may even be more distracting to drivers. Why single out texting or phone use in general? What about the car radio, conversations with passengers, or billboards. You could certainly legislate billboards out of existence if there was support for such an idea. There have been billboards that caused traffic jams (and probably accidents) because they were so distracting. There's a building on the north side of Chicago, right next to the interstate, that would regularly be painted with different large images. Whenever we drove into the city as a child I always wanted to see what was on the building this time. Lots of drivers did too and sometimes there were major traffic jams simply because so many people were slowing down to look at the building (especially when they painted a scene with Michael Jordan) for a lot longer than it takes to advance the music track with your Apple Watch.
What about applying makeup, shaving, eating, drinking (non-alcohol) while driving? All of these can be visually verified by a police officer and are certainly distracting in various significant levels and yet in the USA none of these activities are illegal. Why single out electronics?
I am afraid the answer is a bit simplistic. Even if operating a phone might be dangerous while driving, so is checking the kids on the back sit or adjusting ones hairs and/or appearance using the courtesy mirror or even looking at the passenger. But, and I might be wrong, you cannot catalogue and prohibit all dangerous activities while driving. You still must rely on common sense and general laws. Lawmakers tend to focus on new technology following the same logic that you just used "since we lived without it before we can keep on that way". Is this right?
Why is there any discussion about whether to handle it as a handheld device or a bluetooth accessory? Common sense should dictate that as soon as you have to concentrate on this tiny screen and fumble with the device with your hands, you should simply be fined. You can't tell me doing something on this screen takes less focus than on the smartphone. If the discussion is about where to define the smartwatch as belonging, the discussion is wrong. If the law doesn't allow you to use common sense, then the law should be changed. It REALLY shouldn't be a discussion.
I think it's clear to all who can read: "... use a handheld device that includes a telephone function". It's not handheld and it doesn't include a telephone function.
This is why smarter jurisdictions have laws in place that talk about distracted driving without defining what constitutes a distraction.
The one thing people have to remember about Quebec is that their court system (and almost everything else government related) is not the same as the rest of North America. Also, Quebec never signed on to the Constitution that Canada established.
scottjd wrote: »
I'll try this again since the post didn't take the first time.
The watch does not work without the phone expect for basic time functions, so it's a blutooth accessory.
It's not "handheld", but that's just picking on words. Then again that's what lawyers do all the time.
My eyes travel less from my main point of driving view when using directions to see my next turn on my wrist while on the steering wheel between 10 and 2 o'clock, the. Say if I had to look down and over to the middle of my dash to see the map in my 7 inch GPS screen. This also means my eyes return to the road faster after tilting my wrist and looking at the watch.
To change to the next track in my car I have no physical buttons as previously mentioned to reach over and forward a track. It's phone connected to stereo with blutooth. And to forward a track I again need to look down and over to the center to see the button to push on my screen. Faster and easier on the watch.
As for hey Siri on the phone, well voice commands with Siri sucks with the built in car mic that the phone uses when connected to the car stereo over blutooth. Just not an option. But for me to tilt my watch and say text message "hey Siri, text bla bla, I'm running late" works better then the built in mic. But even I would consider this texting and driving and don't agree with it.
In this case about texting I'm just playing devils advocate, compared to the kid that has one hand on the steering well and is replying to a text message with the phone in his other hand keeping it out of sight under the windshield and out of you from any cops being able to see him reply to this text while he constantly looks down at the phone to make sure he's not typing it wrong.
You can't type a text reply on the watch, only preset responses or It's voice dictation. Even preset quick responses are also available without the watch on my car stereo, after my car stereo politely reads the text message to me. And they put this in the stereo because they thought it was safer then preset responses on a phone. Not really, eyes again further away, longer return and the stereo promotes texting while driving since it reads it to me and has canned responses that I can touch on the screen.
What if I was wearing a normal watch and the alarm when off reminding me to take meds, I reached over with one hand still on the wheel and the other to push a button to stop the alarm. Is that also a violation? Same action was required to push one button. Is my insulin pump now a handle held device when it beeps to tell me I may have a problem with its delivery of insulin. So pulling this off my hip to glance at a message on the pump is also illegal?
Or is this the same as looking at my car stereo to see what station I'm on and then scan for another station?
Why is the car stereo further away from line of site to the road, but the onboard computer screen is between the Tactometer and speedometer to tell me something is wrong like, tire pressure, over heating, my safety cameras no longer can see the road because of heavy rain or direct sun.
Now that's funny, I have to look further away to read a alarm message on the car telling me that the safety cameras are not working, then if I was to flip my wrist and see a message glance on the watch. In fact, even looking at my speed or adjusting my Cruise control takes my eyes further off the road then the watch would to change music track.
Think about how many other things you look at, turn, push or slide for buttons and features on the car alone and how much further your eyes are off the road and that means it takes longer for your eyes to return to the road, in compared to looking at the watch that is practically in the line of site while your eyes are still on the road. Almost like on windshield displays of newer fancy cars from today. and mine is a 2013, not that old at all.
And before anyone asks, yes I've had the watch for 4 weeks now.
maestro64 wrote: »
I'm just curious how the officer saw him use the watch while the guy was driving. Holding a phone to your head is pretty easy to observed, but a simple look to the watch and touch it is much harder to tell what the guy was actually doing. There is more to this story which is not being shared.
If you only read the short posts you won't learn much. Lots of snide throwaways with no content, like yours.
I don’t care what the arguments are about the Apple Watch, if you are distracted when using it then you should NOT use it while driving. A hardcover book is not a phone or a bluetooth accessory either but some idiots probably think they can drive safely while reading one. That’s why the laws exist. It’s about distracted driving, not the legal definition of something. Get a clue and some common sense. Changing the station on a traditional dashboard radio can cause an accident too. Don’t be fiddling around while you drive, period.
stephen joseph wrote: »
We have sued Apple regarding distracted driving and the Apple Watch.
Have you also sued Timex, Casio, Rolex, Fitbit, Google, Tag Heuer, Pebble, and every other watch manufacturer in the world?
stephen joseph wrote: »
We have sued Apple regarding distracted driving and the Apple Watch.
Eyes on the watch means no eyes on the road. In 2013, 3,100 deaths and 424,000 injuries were caused by distracted driving. That is no joke.
The watch is going to be a major distraction. The icons are tiny and third party apps are slow. That means even more time with eyes off the road. Two seconds with eyes of the road can end your life or the lives of others. The road is invisible (repeat: invisible!!!) when you look at the watch. And many people get sucked into looking at the screen and will forget that they are driving. That's why so many people are killed. They literally forget they are driving. See first video on our website if you don't believe it. Those are real dashcam videos.
Try this. Look straight ahead, now look at your watch for two seconds. Can you still see ahead? No you cannot. It's like wearing a blindfold.
Check the videos on our website. If you do nothing else, check the first video on our home page. It's very brief. People just don't appreciate the seriousness of the problem.
Apple has been irresponsible. It must educate people about why it's so dangerous to use the watch when driving and ask them please not to do it.
Coalition Against Distracted Driving