back to article United Nations: For pity's sake don't use your iPhone in your car

The International Telecommunications Union (ITU, the telecoms agency of the United Nations) has published a very short whitelist of mobile phones that are properly compatible with car kits. The phones have been tested to an exacting specification which defines the mechanical mouth used, the mechanical ear and brings scientific …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    No mention of the fact driving with a hand-free mobe isn't really safer. When will people learn that controlling hundreds of pounds of metal is a task requiring full attention?

    1. Richard Taylor 2

      I use two mobiles a Moto G and an iPhone5s.Both seem to have come with a default 'dont annoy me when i am driving' - but sheep will ignores such advice......

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      No mention of the fact driving with a hand-free mobe isn't really safer

      Depends on how you use it. You have to be prepared to act as you would talking to a passenger - in other words shut up if there is the slightest problem ahead of you. If people don't like it, don't phone them and don't answer their calls.

      The ITU is right about one thing, though - the Q10 works perfectly with my Toyota, to the extent that few people realise I am in the car.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: No mention of the fact driving with a hand-free mobe isn't really safer

        One of the problems frequently mentioned is that the passengers in the car with you are aware when something occurs that demands the driver's attention and stop talking. The person on the other end of the phone keeps talking, and if it delays the driver's transfer of attention by a few tenths of a second, that's all it can take to turn a near miss into a collision, or a minor collision into a fatality.

        It is ridiculous that despite all the studies showing that hands free talking is no more safe than holding the phone in your hand, laws are being passed all over that mandate hands free use. That's like saying drunk driving is OK so long as you're only drunk on beer, rather than liquor or wine.

        1. Dazed and Confused
          Flame

          Re: No mention of the fact driving with a hand-free mobe isn't really safer

          > One of the problems frequently mentioned is that the passengers in the car with you are aware when something occurs that demands the driver's attention and stop talking.

          Sorry but this bollocks is dragged out all the time by people who claim that talking to people in the car is safe and talking to people on a hands free is tantamount to premeditated murder. It shows a total lack of knowledge of passengers in the real world.

          These people have clearly never had children or at least have never driven with kids in a car.

          Lots of passengers, even ones who hold a drivers license take no notice of the road ahead and don't stop talking when the driver needs to concentrate.

          Passengers often say things like "Ooo look at that" or point things out on the map/newspaper/mag..., directing the drivers eyes away from the road. People on the other end of a phone like rarely ask you to look at things, well apart from "have you read the email I just sent you..."

          Lots of people find it hard to realise that while it is polite to look at someone you are talking to under normal circumstances it isn't a great idea when driving.

          Sorry, but that line is total bollocks from people who quite rightly want the use of phones in cars banned but realise that banning drivers from talking to passengers isn't going to work.

          While you're at it you may as well ban the radio, lots of people find it impossible to listen to the radio without shouting at the presenter and indulging in hand gestures at the same time.

        2. John Tserkezis

          Re: No mention of the fact driving with a hand-free mobe isn't really safer

          "That's like saying drunk driving is OK so long as you're only drunk on beer, rather than liquor or wine."

          It's worse than that. Statistically(*), you're less likely to get killed or injured *driving* home drunk, rather than *walking* home drunk. Drunk walking is apparently a big problem.

          That's not to say that driving drunk is a good idea, the stats don't mention how many other people you kill or mame on your way home...

          (*) I heard this on a Freakonomics podcast, and as we all know, statistically, you're much more likely to find more accurate information on the radio, rather than the internet. So there.

          1. A Known Coward

            Re: No mention of the fact driving with a hand-free mobe isn't really safer

            It's worse than that. Statistically(*), you're less likely to get killed or injured *driving* home drunk, rather than *walking* home drunk. Drunk walking is apparently a big problem."

            Even assuming that is true, statistics are a tricky thing - drunk drivers often manage to avoid death and inury, sadly the same can't be said for the people they hit. A drunk driver's survival would largely be the result of being encased in a large chunk of protective metal and their body being much more relaxed because of the alcohol in their system. The statistic unhelpfully ignores all accidents where the driver was uninjured, but where other people, including passengers, pediestrians and other road users were killed or injured - never mind the cases were only damage was caused.

    3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      If you really need to give it your full attention all the time either you're doing it wrong or you spend all your time in really horrendous traffic.

      Remember learning to drive? Remember how much mental effort it took at first just to keep the thing pointing where you wanted it to go? You were probably completely shattered after each lesson. That level of attention can't be sustained over a journey of any length and you shouldn't need to.

      Fortunately the stuff which takes so much effort initially gradually becomes automatic. If, in clear weather and free-flowing traffic you find you have to devote conscious thought to just maintaining lane position you really shouldn't be driving. Likewise maintaining distance to the vehicle in front.

      The guy who's tailgating and looking for chances to get by two or three vehicles in one go or overtaking into a blind corner probably is giving it all his attention. But he's not doing it right.

    4. Vince

      I dunno, I find catching up with a friend for an hour whilst driving mile after mile late at night in the dark, down a dark, empty motorway actively keeps me awake and active. It also makes a tedious journey feel much faster.

  2. NoneSuch Silver badge
    Pint

    Ha! Mines on the list, but I turn mine off when driving.

  3. Streaker
    Thumb Up

    The Mobe's aren't that old!!

    Damn, another reason to love my Z30 :)

  4. G.Y.

    inverse hello

    I told a colleague car 'phones conversations need an "inverse hello"; he said the world already exist: "Stand by!" (from aviation lingo)

    Passengers sometimes need this term, too ...

    1. Tom 35

      Re: inverse hello

      Some times level 2 "shut the fuck up" is required I find.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: inverse hello

        > Some times level 2 "shut the fuck up" is required I find.

        Many cars will have a "mute" button on the steering wheel.

        (Mine has one, but I do not use the phone while driving. Not even hands free. It is too much of a distraction and utterly unnecessary.)

        1. Hans 1
          Paris Hilton

          Re: inverse hello

          >> Some times level 2 "shut the fuck up" is required I find.

          >Many cars will have a "mute" button on the steering wheel.

          Yes, however, that does not work on the wife.

  5. JustWondering
    Facepalm

    Oh, to be in England!

    It is encouraging to see that somewhere on this planet are people that understand hands free isn't much safer. Over in my part of the colonies, this fact is a hard sell.

    1. Mark 85

      Re: Oh, to be in England!

      If we're in the same part of the world, just getting it through that holding a phone to your ear and driving is illegal in most states and a really dumb idea. How many idiots are still killed (or kill someone else) while driving and texting even after all the signs, billboards, PSA's, news stories, etc.? I tend to agree that the only thing fixes stupid, is death.

  6. Bump in the night
    Childcatcher

    Maybe not safer but it is convenient

    I knew someone who would drive a stick while smoking, drinking coffee all the while talking on the phone. I understand you are still distracted, but having an extra hand is convenient. Granted you might not think its needed, but with all the other features they claim it’s amazing how many manufacturers can’t get it right.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Maybe not safer but it is convenient

      Do you know me?

  7. Gordon 10
    FAIL

    Real world?

    Isn't the only question worth asking whether they work well in the real world?

  8. RobHib
    Stop

    You mean "once upon a time", don't you?

    "The ITU rules the world's communications. It sets the global standards.... ...The organisation has more gravitas than Morgan Freeman speaking at Gandhi’s Funeral."

    Tries to. Once that was certainly true in the long-gone days when engineers actually ruled—that's before undue influence was brought to bear from large corporations with vested interests. (Once, only governments had influence).

    Similar can also be said of IEEE standards, unfortunately.

  9. Awil Onmearse

    Driving with a handset

    Is not illegal here (Sweden), however careless/reckless driving, driving without due care and attention and vehicular manslaughter of course are.

    The relative lack of carnage on the roads, which are for 6 months of the year subject to environmental conditions that would bring the UK to a complete standstill, would tend to indicate you are doing it wrong.

    Funny how on El Reg. the general commentariat tendency to rabid libertarianism goes completely out the window into manic social-engineer authoritarianism - making things "more illegal" that are already illegal and when it comes to other people doing things that annoy them.

    1. A Known Coward

      Re: Driving with a handset

      Do I dare to suggest that with Sweden's population density of only 23 people per sq km has more to do with the low accident rate? The population density in the England is 413, or 18 times greater. Our roads are much more crowded, as a result inattention while driving is much more likely to result in fatal accidents.

      1. Awil Onmearse
        Stop

        Re: Driving with a handset

        Doesn't wash. The population density in cities in Sweden is roughly equivalent to that in the UK, and a much higher proportion of Swedish people live in cities. As stated before, the road conditions are much worse in winter.

        Outside the cities you have wild moose, wolves, wild boar Lynx and even bears to deal with in a country where the roads are sheets of ice at < -20°C and it is dark 20+ hours a day, and still they manage to have a better safety record.

        Driver education is the key as always. The basic crime is not being in control of your vehicle for whatever reason. Prosecuting handset users for merely using a handset is a Daily Mail-style sop and an load of bollocks in any real sense. Now you have drivers distracted by checking manically for cops when on their phones.

        Apropos cops - as usual with these stupid laws, "the proper authorities" will no doubt have an exemption when barreling along at 150.

    2. Francis Boyle Silver badge

      Yes, I was really "annoyed"

      last time I was killed by a distracted driver.

      Even "rabid libertarians" understand the need for laws against potentially lethal activities.

    3. John Robson Silver badge

      Re: Driving with a handset

      "Funny how on El Reg. the general commentariat tendency to rabid libertarianism goes completely out the window into manic social-engineer authoritarianism - making things "more illegal" that are already illegal and when it comes to other people doing things that annoy them."

      No - it makes things "less illegal" - or at least subject to lower penalties...

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like