The screen is now the single worst thing about a new car, testers found

Vehicle screens have become the leading source of frustration in J.D. Power’s latest multimedia-quality study of new-car owners. The finding does not mean that every display is unsafe or that owners reject digital dashboards altogether. It says the interaction between driver, screen and basic vehicle controls remains a weak point even as screens become larger and more common.

That is a revealing result because the screen is no longer just a radio interface. In many vehicles it controls navigation, climate settings, cameras, phone connection and driver-assistance menus. A frustrating display can therefore turn a minor software annoyance into a repeated task performed while a vehicle is moving.

J.D. Power measures owner-reported problems after purchase

The 2026 U.S. Multimedia Quality and Satisfaction Study is built from new-vehicle owner experience rather than a laboratory test of one dashboard. That distinction matters. It records what people report after living with technology, including touchscreens, built-in audio, connectivity and camera systems, and it can reveal a problem that appears only after repeated daily use.

The study’s point is not that a physical button always beats a screen. J.D. Power’s multimedia research description covers design, feature quality and hands-free technologies. A well-designed screen can reduce clutter and present useful information. The complaint emerges when an owner must hunt through menus, wait for a response or repeat a command that should be immediate.

J.D. Power’s 2025 release put the same tension in direct language: drivers want technology that is easy to use and minimizes distraction, and the firm said a blend of touchscreens and physical buttons can improve usability. That earlier study recorded 4.2 touchscreen and digital-display problems per 100 vehicles, up from 4.0 the prior year.

Basic controls carry a different burden from entertainment features

A screen used for music can be inconvenient if it is slow. A screen used to change temperature, clear a camera view or adjust a safety-related setting has a more immediate usability burden. Drivers expect frequently used functions to be reachable without a long visual search. That is why screen design cannot be evaluated only by size, resolution or the number of apps it can display.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s distraction guidance focuses on the practical fact that visual-manual tasks take attention away from driving. It does not ban screens. It establishes the relevant design question: can a driver understand and operate a function with minimal time looking away from the road?

Manufacturers are responding in different ways. Some preserve knobs or shortcut buttons for climate and volume; others use haptic controls, steering-wheel switches or voice systems. None is automatically superior. Voice systems can misunderstand requests, touch controls can hide choices, and physical controls can be poorly placed. The useful standard is whether the driver can reliably predict what will happen after an input.

Software updates make the dashboard a moving target

A current car interface can change after sale through over-the-air updates. That can fix bugs or improve layouts, but it can also mean that an owner’s learned routine shifts. The NHTSA vehicle-technology material emphasizes that advanced systems should support safe operation; an update that adds features is not automatically a usability improvement.

For a buyer, the study’s result is a reason to test the ordinary tasks during a drive, not only admire the display in a showroom. Connecting a phone, changing temperature, setting a route and using the camera views tell more about a vehicle’s daily interface than a polished home screen does. A short test cannot predict every software issue, but it can reveal whether the control logic makes sense.

J.D. Power’s finding is best read as feedback to an industry still deciding what belongs behind glass. Screens can simplify a cabin, but the survey says their execution is now the single biggest multimedia pain point for new-car owners. The winning design will be the one that makes common driving tasks feel immediate, predictable and easy to reverse.

There is a cost issue as well as a design issue. A physical switch can often be replaced or understood in isolation, while a screen fault may depend on software versions, a failed display, a connected-service account or an update schedule. That makes clear documentation and repair support part of usability. A carmaker can call a cabin “digital,” but an owner experiences it as a set of everyday controls that must continue to work when a phone is disconnected, a subscription expires or a screen needs service.

Testers also need to separate novelty from useful complexity. A giant display can make a cabin feel modern in a photograph, but owners judge it during a rainstorm, at night, with a passenger asking for a temperature change or after an update rearranges the menu. The study’s warning is therefore a design opportunity: keep the information-rich tasks on the screen while making the actions needed most often obvious enough to use without a search.

This article was produced with the assistance of AI and reviewed by Morning Overview editors prior to publication.

More from Morning Overview