Software Version: 6.67.83; Post Date: Sep 08, 2015; OS: Windows 8, Windows 7, Windows Vista, Windows XP (or older), Windows 10; File Size: 81 MB. Smart Installer, Full Installer 32-bit, Full Installer 64-bit. Download Now. Works with these products. Previous software versions. Version: 6.67.82. This is a widely used Bluetooth driver and many devices make us of this to ensure that their mobile phones can work. The BlueSoleil Bluetooth driver works on a number.

Well with the poor driving standards evidenced these days, no wonder Auto parking is now deemed 'a necessity'. Long gone is the need to 'prove' one's ability to DRIVE & control a car. Now its 'insert key' or more likely, push remote control, disengage brain. Auto transmission, cruise control ( as well as need to focus on their GPS) etc, no wonder people are adapt at crashing their vehicles. Because the need to co-ordinate and be responsible for input action has diminished, so the brain is no longer actively engaged and I believe, dulled. Well with the poor driving standards evidenced these days, no wonder Auto parking is now deemed 'a necessity'. Long gone is the need to 'prove' one's ability to DRIVE & control a car.

Now its 'insert key' or more likely, push remote control, disengage brain. Auto transmission, cruise control ( as well as need to focus on their GPS) etc, no wonder people are adapt at crashing their vehicles. Because the need to co-ordinate and be responsible for input action has diminished, so the brain is no longer actively engaged and I believe, dulled. Mac Mac, I somewhat agree with you.

But when you look around car parks and see many vehicles with swipes up and down the panels, it makes you wonder if it really is a bad thing. If some halfwit pulls up next to my car, I do hope they can actually park the damn thing, or at least have enough gumption to press the 'park assist' button before they check their facebook status. Mac, I somewhat agree with you.

But when you look around car parks and see many vehicles with swipes up and down the panels, it makes you wonder if it really is a bad thing. Actually it makes me wonder why these people still have licenses. I say that as someone who has had all of their cars damaged by bad parkers.

My main concerns with this technology is that it will make drivers even more complacent than they already are and that the technology actually works. I don't trust it to be able to cope with the full spectrum of human stupidity. Above that, what happens as the sensors and equipment ages? Things tend to fail as they get older, the more complex the technology the more avenues for failure. A new self parking car might work but just give it a year or two of neglect by Suzie Soccermum. Further more, what happens when park assist hits another car, even our best, most reliable technologies are so very far from infallible.

Who is held responsible? The driver who was not in control or the manufacturer who sold the technology (or the other company who developed it). I can add Skoda to this list. Haven't checked out all models, but the Yeti at least has it.

For Skoda it's called Park Assist. • Skoda Superb – standard on Wagons, optional extra on Sedans (comes with front and reaar parking sensors), this is the first gen of Park assist that can only do parallel parking automatically. • The new Skoda Octavia – the model has Park Assist 2, automatic parallel and 90* parking, optional feature or part of Tech Pack on Ambition Plus, Elegance and RS • Skoda Yeti – optional, same system as Superb • Skoda Fabia – n/a as far as I know, but it's a small car:) Slightly off topic but the Octavia (being a brand new model) also comes with Adaptive Cruise Control with City Emergency braking, optional feature or part of Tech Pack on Ambition Plus, Elegance and RS. Well with the poor driving standards evidenced these days, no wonder Auto parking is now deemed 'a necessity'. Long gone is the need to 'prove' one's ability to DRIVE & control a car. Now its 'insert key' or more likely, push remote control, disengage brain. My main concerns with this technology is that it will make drivers even more complacent than they already are and that the technology actually works.

I don't trust it to be able to cope with the full spectrum of human stupidity. Pretty much any new technology is often met with caution and sometimes even fear. Consider however that, as autonomous car technologies mature, they might actually make driving safer. The Google cars for example have been shown to be safer driving autonomously then when they are driven with human input (the only 2?

I think accidents being attributed to human mistakes). Now, I'm not entirely excited by being excluded from the driving experience but there are times when not having to drive would have been welcome (when my little one throws a bit of a fit for example). Above that, what happens as the sensors and equipment ages? Things tend to fail as they get older, the more complex the technology the more avenues for failure. A new self parking car might work but just give it a year or two of neglect by Suzie Soccermum. How is this different to ABS, ECS, engine management or any other electronic system running pretty much every aspect of a car.

Or by that token, train, ship or aircraft? Further more, what happens when park assist hits another car, even our best, most reliable technologies are so very far from infallible. Who is held responsible? The driver who was not in control or the manufacturer who sold the technology (or the other company who developed it).

Why would it matter? At that point the other party chases the car's owner for damages. At the end of the day.

The driver always is in control of the car, regardless of whether the park assist technology is on or not. It will be up to the owner of the car to then chase up the manufacturer for damages if they choose to do so. In most of these systems, the driver is still in control of the accelerator/brake. The first woulda been the Merc S-Class and the other euros. The problem with making that statement is that the S class isnt a car available to the avg. Australian making its efficacy to that research minimal i didnt put that the VE out there as some kind of awesome car because its largely a piece of shit but its at least affordable to many people so therefore its safety aspects would have an impact on the research numbers and I would be expecting Ford etc.

To match the commodore tech for tech in the same time period. Actually it does.

Actually it doesnt. Crash rates have continued to drop since the early 1980s and are about 30% less now than they were immediately post RBT. None of the drop can be ascribed to driver assist technologies which haven't been around long enough to be measured in yearly statistics and cars with driver assist technologies still crash.

My point is not that driver assisted technologies have resulted in reduced crash rates. Its that you cannot simply assert that drivers today are worse than they used to be, because all the evidence is that they are having fewer crashes. If, as you say, the technology hasnt been around long enough to be a factor, presumably the drop is due to something else. Maybe driver skills? All driver assist technologies do is give bad drivers a false sense of security. Fat32 Hard Drive Formatter Program Comcast. I predict there will be no reduction in car park scratches or red light rear-ends due to careless drivers.

No one says the techology will reduce all accidents. But, seriously, how can you assume everyone else is too stupid to understand how technology helps and doesnt help them and where the dangers are? I mean, I have been driving for 25 years and have never had an accident, so good driver? On the other hand, I have twice scratched the front bumper bar in an underground carpark.

So bad driver? Heat Transfer 9th Edition Solution Manual Jp Holman more. Probably a front sensor would have helped me. That said, I dont understand why anyone would want auto parking. Do driver assisted technologies give you a false sense of security – no. Actually it doesnt. Crash rates have continued to drop since the early 1980s and are about 30% less now than they were immediately post RBT. RBT's weren't the only safety feature introduced outside the car.

Of course you also have to consider seatbelt laws and the introduction of the seatbelt pre-tensioner. The overwhelming majority of the drop in fatalities and crashes can be attributed to speed, seatbelt and alcohol enforcement. Its that you cannot simply assert that drivers today are worse I didn't.

I'm asserting that driver assist technologies wont make them any better. In fact it wont change a thing. On the other hand, I have twice scratched the front bumper bar in an underground carpark. Probably a front sensor would have helped me. You've never driven a car with a sensor have you.

Not asking a question because here's exactly what happens when Dopey Doris parks with her parking sensor. BEEP BEEP BEEP CRUNCH. I've seen people do this. If you didn't see you were too close in a forward park, you would have likely ignored the sensor too. I'm not berating you becuase we all make mistakes but a sensor wouldn't have stopped you from making the same mistake.

Do driver assisted technologies give you a false sense of security Most certainly. People already think that driver assist technologies make them immortal.

Pretty much any new technology is often met with caution and sometimes even fear. Consider however that, as autonomous car technologies mature, they might actually make driving safer. The Google cars for example have been shown to be safer driving autonomously then when they are driven with human input (the only 2? I think accidents being attributed to human mistakes). I dont disagree here.

However, this isn't the problem. The problem is that people will start to depend on this technology to save them and it wont work as they intended. How is this different to ABS, ECS, engine management or any other electronic system running pretty much every aspect of a car. Because parking is a basic skill to be used every day. ABS, ECS et al are safety features designed to kick in only when needed and they dont guarantee anything, they only increase your chances. ABS isn't even close to being in the same league of automation.

Trying to compare parking assist or lane assist to ABS only demonstrates you dont understand how either technology works. Why would it matter? At that point the other party chases the car's owner for damages. Who then tries to pass it on to whoever they can. In the mean time you're the one with the damaged car. Ultimately, this kind of technology is either going to be ignored by the driver or misused by the driver.

The electric power steer on the VF is brilliant! The fact that it provides feather touch finger control at low speeds and then tightens considerably at higher speeds makes it perfect overall in my opinion.

Forget it, there's no helping some people the reality is companies will push tech that they think is good for us, the tail doesnt wag the dog i love hydraulic steering, it has feel and anyone can fix it however i'm not blind to the fact that the industry is moving towards this as it has real benefits btw. Speed sensitive steering predates electric steering. New X5 (F15 model) has self parking where the car does the accelerating and braking.

All you have to do is hold the parking button. Quite scary the first time as it actually parks quite quickly but it is damn accurate especially with distance from kerb.

You push the park button before you get to the line of cars and indicate direction where you want to park. As you drive past it tells you to stop once it has measured the correct size parking space. Then you hold on to the button again and it does its thing. The most expensive parking button ever:). Good technology cant compensate for bad drivers. Both Volvo and Mercedes-Benz disagree.

Both companies have a goal to reduce the number of deaths and injuries. ABS, ESP, Airbags, side intrusion bars have done all they can do make this happen. Next step is to remove the human factor all together. Yes, replace the driver.

My A45 is very impressive with radar cruise control in peak hour traffic. To the point where I use it every day as a safety feature. It maintains the perfect stopping distance and can react to a pile up faster then me. But this is step in getting me to accept that in the coming years the car will drive itself. Volvo have been testing a system where you get out of your car at the designated drop off point to the shopping center or building then it goes and parks itself.

App on your phone to ask it to come collect you when you return. Awesome idea, saves driving around finding a spot, automated cars don't need to leave gaps between them, more cars fit and most importantly no people allowed in the car park and its private property so actually may be allowed sooner then governments can adapt. This is just the start!

And no I've never used the auto park but I better go practice with it somewhere quiet before I stuff it up in public! Out of curiosity, does anyone actually want this feature, and more importantly, actually use it after trying it once or twice? I still love cars from the late 90s, early 2000. I like to show off my skills. I show everyone I don't need loads of technology to be a safe driver. Power steering, abs brakes, conventional manual transmission.thats good enough for me. Like today and yesterday.

I did a kerbside reverse park to pick up someone from the train station. One of those ¼P bays.it was perfect.swift and accurate. I want the person behind me to notice how quickly I parked. What satisfaction do you get from holding your hands in the air and having people on the footpath watch your car park itself?

Now its 'insert key' or more likely, push remote control, disengage brain. Auto transmission, cruise control ( as well as need to focus on their GPS) etc, no wonder people are adapt at crashing their vehicles.

Because the need to co-ordinate and be responsible for input action has diminished, so the brain is no longer actively engaged and I believe, dulled.Mac +1. We really are headed in the direction where reality will mirror the second half of the movie 'Wall-E'. If you've seen it, you'll know what I mean. My A45 is very impressive with radar cruise control in peak hour traffic.

To the point where I use it every day as a safety feature. It maintains the perfect stopping distance and can react to a pile up faster then me. It can only watch the distance to the car in front, whereas a competent driver should be looking through and around the car in front to *anticipate* traffic. If you're in a line of traffic, you should be watching for the brake lights of cars 2-3 in front of you, not just focusing on the rear bumper of the car in front. That's not to say this tech isn't useful, and it's certainly safer than a bad or distracted driver. If you're in a line of traffic, you should be watching for the brake lights of cars 2-3 in front of you, not just focusing on the rear bumper of the car in front.

What if you're behind a truck car (SUV) or a real truck or a high backed van? How can you see 2-3 cars in front? So, yes, in certain traffic conditions, you have to be: just focusing on the rear bumper of the car in front. But keep a extra safe distance behind. But you should do that anyway no matter what's in front of you, so why do we need the radar system? Still, the A45AMG is a stunning beast in terms of its performance. Back to on topic, the model of my car (BMW F30) has the auto reverse park option, but I laughed when I saw it was on offer.

I can still parallel reverse park my car very well. So for the time being. Don't take this the wrong way but you sound a bit of a pillock! You want people to admire your parking skills? I want people to admire many things.

Such as me merging into 110 traffic at 110. I glance in my rear view at the driver behind that is struggling to merge at 80 and I feel sorry for all the other cars behind him. That driver behind me is probably thinking.'

Oh I wish I could merge at 110 like that car ahead.now he is pulling away into the distance' What if I come across someone in a shopping centre carpark that takes a few attempts and holds a line of cars? It's ok to wait that extra 30 to 60 seconds for an incompetent driver? We can't have everyone taking their time or congestion will build up quickly. Am I really a pillock for talking about reasonable driving standards?:).

I get the feeling that self park will be very common is a few years time Increasing the amount of negligent and incompetent drivers on the road. +1 My concern is drivers jumping into a vehicle without parking assist and struggling to park at the shops.and then hitting another vehicle. Professional racing drivers still race go carts to keep their skills sharp.am I correct? Everyday drivers should do the same. Ie people shouldnt rely too much on technology. I've driven newer cars that belong to family members.my sisters 2012 corolla ascent sport has factory blind spot mirrors. Yet I still do head checks.

Looking forward to see which manufacturer brings out the 'mum on the school run' mode in a small car How about a 'young men who kill and injure themselves (and others) at a far higher rate than any other population group' car? Oh, I forgot – young men are the most skilled drivers of everyone. They dont need any technology. Increasing the amount of negligent and incompetent drivers on the road.

Because parking causes road driving problems? My problem is the assumption that people who rely on technology are too stupid to understand the limitations of that technology.

But most people, you know, arent too stupid. Indeed, the stupid ones are the ones that eschew technology and end up crashing due to a moment of inattention or (more likely) overwhelming but falsely based arrogance as to their driving skill.

Is there technology that isnt necessary – sure, I dont think parking assist is needed. Personally I dont care whether my phone speaks to me via bluetooth through 10 speakers, because I'm happy to wait until I stop driving to answer my phone. Does it mean that everyone else who wants that stuff is a bad driver? Because parking causes road driving problems? Kerb side parking certainly does. Especially when they do a piss poor job holding up traffic in peak hour doing 50 point turns to park their car properly and still fail.

Does it mean that everyone else who wants that stuff is a bad driver? The stupid ones are the ones that eschew technology and end up crashing due to a moment of inattention or (more likely) overwhelming but falsely based arrogance as to their driving skill. And this, I fear, will become more common with these newer technologies where people become too reliant on the technology of their car to actually focus on what is happening around them. Parking sensors to l33t merging skills.

My this thread has digressed:P It's a valid point. We don't want everyone driving high tech cars and then they don't bother maintaining cruicial skills.

Like I said, pro racing drivers also train themselves regularly with go carts am I correct? Imagine my brother in law who is 21 buying a high tech car and never manually parking for the next 30 years. I'm not lending my car to him that doesnt have parking assist tech. I don't want scratches when he returns it. I will get over it. Now let's get back to simply listing cars with parking technology.

Migoreng, deep down i'm with you i beleive people should try to better what is probably their most dangerous activity of the day i also respect people who actively want to drive manual cars and turn off all the AIDS and trying to understand what a car handles like without all the training wheels i accept that there are lot of electric doodads that allegedly help the safety of the car, i just ask you can turn them off whats the worst possible outcome of auto parking? A few slow speed dents or scrapes its not about to claim any lives (unlike self driving). And this, I fear, will become more common with these newer technologies where people become too reliant on the technology of their car to actually focus on what is happening around them. But this is my point – where is the evidence, beyond your assertion, that technology reduces driving skills (rather than, for example, sitting on top of and thus enhancing someone's existing skill level – or, perhaps, reducing the impact of someones poor driving skills)?

Does the technology in your car make you a worse driver? Why are you different to everyone else? The figures show that crash rates are down significantly from the years when there was no technology. Crash rates, not (just) fatality and injury rates. That suggests something – technology, skill level, better roads or more policing(or a combination) -is working. Its like all those people who say 'oh, if you cant drive a manual, you arent a real skilled driver'. No, you rely on technology (auto in this case) to an appropriate level For example, blind spot warning: - should it be needed – obviously no - is it needed – well, I see people every day changing lanes without checking their blind spot (and, as a cyclist, I see it quite a lot) - will blind spot warnings reduce driver skills – arguably no because lots of people do the wrong thing anyway so it can only increase their skills.

Augmented with technology for sure, but its still a skill increase. Well its a bit odd for someone to pay if they're not going to use it. A lot of the time though, it comes as standard on a particular trim grade or as a package with some actual desirable options. It costs the manufacturer stuff all to add, since the electric power steering and side mounted sensors are already in place.

It's just some extra software. I would glady buy a new car of it was possible to remove certain features to save money. Agreed, but unfortunately that's where the manufacturers make their money. Charge $2k for something that costs about $200 to develop and add to a car. 'Stripper spec' cars don't make any money. Agreed but most of those dings/bangs & scrapes I would believe are by people unable to drive forward into a bay centrally and opening doors into adjacent vehicles My own vehicle has gained one such scratch/dent; looking at the height, I would suggest from a 4WD. The point I was making in my original post was that unlike years ago, modern vehicles are fitted with all the bells & whistles which further result in the need for driver ability being diluted, virtually to the point of just being a 'Steerer'.

With Park Assist', even this is skill is being superceeded. As a WP member mentioned, It gives reassurance to many who would other otherwise fail their Driving Test Assessment or otherwise not be deemed to be competent to operate a motor vehicle. Whilst I recognise Australia wide, road fatality statistics have declined over the past 2>3 decades, other factors such as seat belt, blood alcohol, improved ADR's and vehicle construction methodology have had greater influence.

I will get howled down but for starters, all drivers going for their initial driving licence should have to gain it on a manual vehicle. Yes this may mean that a learner driver might to have lessons with a Professional Driving School. Similarly, a defensive driving course should also be mandatory before getting your licence.

The point I was making in my original post was that unlike years ago, modern vehicles are fitted with all the bells & whistles which further result in the need for driver ability being diluted, virtually to the point of just being a 'Steerer'. When I was a lad. We aren't talking about wind-in-your-hair, twisty mountain roads weekend driving. What about M-F rush hour grind when the streets are packed and you can lose your concentration for a second and make a mistake.

Same with parking, if the assist makes you a bit more accurate, why not? Even the best drivers could over/underestimate the gap by a couple of inches and touch bumpers, no big deal but embarrassing if it is front of the local, packed cafe.

Same with parking, if the assist makes you a bit more accurate, why not? And I highly doubt it does. People who are bad drivers and don't know it (see: the Dunning-Kruger effect) will ignore it. Automatic systems can easily get in the way of a good driver by doing something the driver does not expect and is not prepared to compensate for. The critical difference between a good driver and a bad driver is that a good driver is aware of their surroundings and has planned ahead, despite this, things do still go wrong (such as Dopey Doris swinging out in her SUV without warning). I highly doubt these systems will fix the issue with bad parkers, in fact I think it will create more by giving the sub par parkers who know their sub par and take their time false confidence.

Most of our mistakes come from us believing something is better than it is (not the least of these things are ourselves). And I'm not against electric steering, It's cheaper / almighty better fuel economy isn't it?

Also drive-by-wire is cheaper, replace the cruise control servo with a few lines of code. =) Automatic systems can easily get in the way of a good driver by doing something the driver does not expect and is not prepared to compensate for. =( Most of our mistakes come from us believing something is better than it is (not the least of these things are ourselves). Yes it would be better if folks recognized their own (severe) incompetence (if applicable). I make sure to do this! The point I was making in my original post was that unlike years ago, modern vehicles are fitted with all the bells & whistles which further result in the need for driver ability being diluted, virtually to the point of just being a 'Steerer'. So I assume you're talking about going to the good old days of driving one of or, right, because those are the real deal.

You're not a real driver until you muster driving one of the original driving experiences and given that none of the cars of that era offered a standardised set of controls, you had to muster each car individually. Or are you defining pure driving experience as driving a synch mesh manual, which effectively is cheating. Because, I find it quite hilarious when people preach against 'muddying the pure driving experience' with those slush boxes, or DSGs, or this or that when pretty much any car since 1930's is anything but a pure driving experience. Also as such, the decline in good guitarists means that we ended up with rap, techno and dubstep becoming dominant. The decline in manual instrumental skills in music paints an ominous picture for motoring. I'm sure your parents have the same sentiments as you do about the music of their youth and the music you listened/listen to.:) and so do their parents, and so on and so on.

The reality is that we bitch about how the younger generations lose the essential skills but forget that we (for example) have no trouble using technology while many parents of people our age do. Each successive generation develops new skills and sure, they might lose others but that's the way of progress. I'm in two minds about automation of the driving experience but no one can deny that average drive these days is a work or shopping trip, usually in heavy traffic. There's nothing pleasurable about wasting hours each week on the road. I see no problem with autonomous vehicles being able to take you to work/home while you get to do other things and reclaim some of that time.

In an interesting comparison although unrelated, on a TV show last night (Aircrash Confidential) it focused on the role of Auto Pilot and the ability of pilots to make correct decisions in the event of a failure in the system. 2 segments focused on aircrashes where lives were lost as a result of the Auto Pilot imposing control due to erroneous inputs and the failure of the pilots to take control & disengage the AP due to their steadfast belief that the AP system was fail safe. Interestingly a similar situation was narrowly averted on a QANTAS Hobart>Sydney flight only because the pilot recognised what was happening and took control. Automatic systems which remove the need for human (driver) input also produce this reliance and result in a reduced reaction (increased reaction time) to situations.

Of course one could argue that if not for many of these systems on cars, people would not be able to 'DRIVE' Auto transmissions are my biggest gripe.At least with a manual transmission, the driver needs to be able to co-ordinate clutch, gear lever & accelerator pedal. More mental input= greater awareness, better reaction time. Cornering is planned further ahead as is slowing in heavy traffic. Cruise control, virtual no need to control accelerator leading to further disengagement of the brain. GPS navigation. With voice guidance, just rely upon what you're told.

Too bad if the route chosen gets you further lost My point is that whilst modern systems offer some practical 'advantages', they produce negative consequences in the process. How far is far enough? Auto transmissions are my biggest gripe.At least with a manual transmission, the driver needs to be able to co-ordinate clutch, gear lever & accelerator pedal. More mental input= greater awareness, better reaction time. Or more mental input into driving the car and less on the surrounds.

Focus on the upcoming corner not on the fact that there is a cyclist in the other lane and the car coming toward you is going to pull out. Plus always driving with one hand on the steering wheel. The act of driving is not hard. The act of knowing what is going on around you is hard.

Making the former easier bears no relationship to the latter. And autopilot on airlines is somewhat different to anything in a car. I just find it interesting that people say 'well, I'm not affected by all this technology, but I know it will make other people worse'. My point is that whilst modern systems offer some practical 'advantages', they produce negative consequences in the process. How far is far enough? That's how just the way the world works, not only with cars but with everything.

I go to a butcher = I have no idea how to hunt pigs. Same with mobile phones. I grew up not having one. Back then it was common to tell people where you were going or what your plan was for the day so you can agree on a meeting time later in the day. Nowadays I just leave the house and say 'call me when you wanna meet up'.

Probably dumbed down my planning skills but don't really mind. Automatic systems which remove the need for human (driver) input also produce this reliance and result in a reduced reaction (increased reaction time) to situations. Of course one could argue that if not for many of these systems on cars, people would not be able to 'DRIVE' At the same time you should also consider the fact that the aviation industry is reaching the highest safety records figures. The number of flights taking off daily is mind staggering. The number of fatal crashes pales in comparison. And when considering automatic systems, that fateful Airbus crash in Russia where pilots allowed children to take controls of a plane eventually resulting in the plane spiralling out of control would have been avoided if the pilots simply let go of the control allowing the automatic system to take the plane out of the death spiral.

Now, granted, there were many failures in training and so on. Auto transmissions are my biggest gripe.At least with a manual transmission, the driver needs to be able to co-ordinate clutch, gear lever & accelerator pedal. More mental input= greater awareness, better reaction time. BS, particularly in city driving.

You're either engaged or distracted. A manual transmission is not going to change that but adds to the number of things a driver has to keep track of. A bad thing, maybe/maybe not but I suspect it differs from person to person, the very same intrinsic personality and ability differences that make some good cooks, or handymen, or navigators while others fail miserably at the tasks. Cruise control, virtual no need to control accelerator leading to further disengagement of the brain. Oh come on, I've driven long distances on a car without cruise control. Regardless of how much of a rock star driver you are, there's a point where after driving for a while, you listen to a fantastic song and sooner than you realise, you're travelling 30-40 km/h over the speed limit. Nothing tragic, you're perfectly in control of the car, not endangering anyone but it's just a slip of the mind but all it takes is a cop with a radar gun behind a bush at that very moment.

Cruise Control is a great way of avoiding speeding tickets. GPS navigation. With voice guidance, just rely upon what you're told. Too bad if the route chosen gets you further lost So I'll throw another one at you, I've started using Waze recently and quite happy to be able to get real traffic data so the system can help me avoid traffic congestion and use knowledge of local drivers to take me down a short cut. That said, I always check and memorise routes anyway and then again I've never been lost even without a map in a city. My point is that whilst modern systems offer some practical 'advantages', they produce negative consequences in the process. How far is far enough?

As far as it takes us, as long as we have the skills to fall back on manual processes. I'm going to teach my kids to read a map, go camping, no GPRS coverage.:). Oh come on, I've driven long distances on a car without cruise control. Regardless of how much of a rock star driver you are, there's a point where after driving for a while, you listen to a fantastic song and sooner than you realise, you're travelling 30-40 km/h over the speed limit. I have never done this. I think the problem with cruise control is you rest your foot so far from the brake it delays braking time considerably.

But I dont see a problem with parking aids and such. Also stability control does things that are not possible for a driver, watch this. Of course if either of us want to argue what we both know is true and use (have used)in our wide driving experiences, then all the 'EXPERTS' would want to shoot us down in flames mostly out of ignorance. End of the day a competent driver can judge their speed by the surroundings around the vehicle, especially at relatively common speeds (50/80/100) these days i rarely look at the speedo other then the occasional glance if i change speed zones. Its not overly difficult. Cruise control is nice and all, but its an aid, not something you need to have.

Not wrong there. (Of course Road ranger is a proprietary name) Non synchromesh G/box being the 'politically correct terminology' Interestingly up to late 2012, was a HV driving instructor & licence assessor. Have trained both genders in the operation of such vehicles. Still remember training 3 guys in their 50's who had been retrenched from senior management roles. All picked up on the skill necessary, passing their licence assessment. Each said to me they wished they had done so much earlier.

Unfortunately even the Automated world is ever increasing encroaching into this industry. Nowadays, people want the easy option.

The knowledge let alone the practical skills are disappearing. Sadly the attitude and willingness to learn has likewise vanished. Ok, so your view is that everyone without your sensational skills shouldn't be on the road? Going to crate a big burden on public transport. I never said I have sensational skills, infact what we are talking about is very basic and fundamental stuff, something that is no longer taught because of aids removing that portion of the skill set away. (Cruise control) But skill sets are going to continually decline over time because of self training from parents to new drivers (bad drivers teaching bad habits to new drivers) and new technology which rather then being used as an aid, being relied upon constantly. You didn't get much help, did you Leo?

It was an excellent topic, and I also hoped to find many additions to your list. There were some, but what? 95% of the posts failed to address your request at all, instead creating and contributing to arguments for and against the idea of such parking assistance. Difficult to assess whether it is limited literacy or deliberate intention of failing to contribute to the topic which caused the comments of the 95% to be made. Whatever it was, we're not much further forward, which is a great shame.

Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device now has a special edition for these Windows versions: Windows 7, Windows 7 64 bit, Windows 7 32 bit, Windows 10, Windows 10 64 bit,, Windows 10 32 bit, Windows 8, Windows 10 Home 32bit, Windows Vista Home Basic 32bit, Windows 8 Pro 64bit, Windows XP Starter Edition 32bit, Windows Vista Home Basic 64bit, Windows 7 Home Basic 64bit, Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit, Windows 10 Enterprise 32bit, Windows 7 Starter 64bit, Windows 7 Service Pack 1 (Microsoft Windows NT) 32bit. Driver Model OS Original Upload Date Last Modification Driver File File Size Compatible Computer Models Availabilty To Instalation Manager Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device 2690 For Windows 7 32 bit 2/17/2015 all_drivers-2690.exe 167kb HP GQ498AAR-ABA m9047c, HP HP Compaq 6715s, Panasonic CF-30KBPAX2M, HP EJ161AA-UUZ t3220.ch, Toshiba Satellite C660-2KF, SAMSUN M2410, HP VS417AA-ABF s5224f, Gigabyte G41MT-D3V, Daewoo CT7150, Toshiba Satellite A100-626, Lenovo ThinkCentre M77, Matsonic MS9387E, EDsys EHI33220M, and more. Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device V44073 For Windows 7 64 bit all_drivers-v44073.exe 187kb Fujitsu FMVXD4NJ4Z, Sony VGN-SZ38GP_C, LG Z20NH.AR51B3E, Lenovo ThinkCentre M55e, Lenovo 6072Y76, Acer TravelMate P455, LG R490-K.AFE3BZ, LG R510-S.AP87K, Lenovo ThinkPad Edge E430, Lenovo 6075Y5X, Exper ACTIVEDEX144, Sony VPCEB1E1E, HP PS139AA-ABX a710.fi, and more.

Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device I1.10662 For Windows 7 1/25/2015 lgwlt-i1.10662.exe 219kb Sony SVE14123CBP, Lenovo 6075Y74, IBM 2388DXU, BenQ Joybook P51, Intel IntelDQ965GF, HP AY690AA-ABM 600-1120la, Fujitsu CLW8GAG1D, IBM 2373K53, Sony VPCEJ3D1E, and more. Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device 1.102.12.12.1 For Windows 10 9/14/2014 all_drivers-1.102.12.12.1.exe 80kb IBM 2724NM0, Lenovo 7663V2L, IBM 1871Y16, Sony VPCEB4E9R, Daewoo CT7150, IBM 8189WB2, Acer C-VX2611G, and more.

Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device A1.101.142.1 For Windows 10 64 bit all_drivers-a1.101.142.1.exe 116kb HP 27-1015ef, Gateway CT5628, Fujitsu S6410C, NEC PC-VY13MRFEAEHU, Toshiba Dynabook T350/36ACS, ALFATRON SpA DN1020/M, LG LB50-CC34ZL, and more. Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device K3088 For Windows 7 32 bit 9/16/2014 zoppuianj-k3088.exe 73kb Fujitsu FMVNB70E, Packard Bell IMEDIA F5750, Lenovo 6457W8Q, Samsung Q320/P320, MouseComputer H87M-S01, HP P6570jp, Intel WIV, NEC PC-VJ22GXNEHTXA, Sony VGN-NS328J, Lenovo ThinkPad X200, Fujitsu FMVNXA90N, HP KZ692AA-ABU m9373.uk-a, and more. Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device 32840 For Windows 7 64 bit all_drivers-32840.exe 120kb Toshiba SATELLITE C850-1P6, LG F1-225GY, SAMSUN 100NZA, NEC PC-VY25AAZR7, Packard Bell ISTART D2141, Lenovo 2429B56, Sony VGN-SZ15LP_B, HP HPE-310pt, Sony VGN-FS115ZR, Panasonic CF-30CASAXBM, and more. Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device 72838 For Windows 7 9/14/2014 all_drivers-72838.exe 179kb Sony VPCCW15FG, Lenovo ThinkPad X300, HP PS139AA-ABX a710.fi, HP S5680es, and more. Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device 32684 For Windows 10 1/29/2015 all_drivers-32684.exe 38kb Fujitsu FMVA0300C, Panasonic CF-53JAWZYFN, Sony VPCW21A7E, Seneca Pro213935, LG LG PC, Toshiba S2400-103, Supermicro X7QC3, Dell Vostro 1450, Compaq DT176A-ABE S5320ES ES340, Packard Bell IMEDIA D4129 BE, and more.

Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device 2.10379 For Windows 10 64 bit -2.10379.exe 125kb IBM System x3650 M3 -[7945AC1, Lenovo ThinkPad R400, NEC PC-VJ22MAUEHTXV, Sony VPCEL13FX, HP HP PAVILION DV9000 KP950EA#ABF, NEC PC-VY16GWZR4, and more. Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device D31.1404 For Windows 8 3/3/2015 all_drivers-d31.1404.exe 50kb Fujitsu D2364-A3, Gateway E4252, HP 100-5010b, Transource Computer Systems, HP CQ1160FRm, Panasonic CF-19KHRAXAG, HP ProLiant DL360 G3, Mecer X105, and more. Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device N21.1298 For Windows 7 32 bit 3/8/2015 -n21.1298.exe 91kb Exper ACTIVEDEX144, Sony VPCEB1E1E, HP PS139AA-ABX a710.fi, HP Pavilion dv5000, Dell Inspiron 3531, Fujitsu FMVNFD75R, Sony PCG-FXA35/D, HP PS384AA-B1U d1291.se, IBM 2373WMZ, ASUS BP6260, and more. Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device L21.1272.1 For Windows 7 64 bit 1/29/2015 jklwbbo-l21.1272.1.exe 153kb NEC PC-MJ30VEZE1, Acer TravelMate P455, Packard Bell IMEDIA D7010 NL, Toshiba Dynabook T350/36ACS, IBM 2724JU1, Compaq KY775AA-AB1 CQ3010KL, Toshiba DynaBook V7, Acer NC-E1-531-B9604G, Acer TM6595, ASUS U24E, Fujitsu AMILO PRO V3515, and more. Please Note: There are particular operating systems known to have problems with Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device: • Windows 7 Home Basic • Windows 10 • Windows 10 Home • Windows XP Home Edition, for home desktops and laptops • Windows 7 Enterprise (Microsoft Windows NT) • Windows 10 Education • Windows Vista Ultimate • Windows 10 Team • Windows 7 Professional If you encounter problems with the direct download for these operating systems, please consult the driver download manager for the specific Itech Dynamic Bluetooth Device model.