JohnH wrote:
>>Are you saying that having the headlights come on automatically
>>with the wipers is a good thing? It is not. It is yet another dumbass
>>'nanny' feature that denies drivers of their full control of their
>>vehicle.
>
>
> You technophobes crack me up.
>
> It's not "nanny", it's the law here - headlights must be on when wipers
> operating. On my 98 Jeep, they come on with the lights when the lights are
> in "auto" mode (which I always use).

ITYM "come on with the wipers" yes?

>
> It's about as "nanny" as having your brake light come on when you put on the
> brakes. But I suppose you'd prefer a switch on the dash to do that.
>

I personally don't like "auto" mode to begin with. My philosophy on
such things is that if you provide an "auto" mode then drivers will
assume that no thought needs to be given to light use, ever - which we
know isn't the case. Thus, if you provide an "auto" mode it should be
as close to truly automatic as it's possible to be, because users will
treat it as such. The reason GM is getting scorn for their
implementation is that they have provided an "auto" mode that isn't
truly automatic - it doesn't turn the lights on under conditions that
ought to be easily detectable by the control circuit and yet in most
areas legally require that the lights be turned on. Hence, a sucky
design. The way you describe your Jeep working sounds much more
logical. But overall, the added complexity, to me, isn't worth it, as
at least for me turning on the lights when it's
dark/foggy/rainy/whatever is as automatic as shifting - and having
worked on enough older cars, I can definitively state that I prefer
working on the ones with fewer automatic gadgets as opposed to more.

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel