Hidden interface controls that affect usability

I drive a Toyota that is nearly old enough to run for US Senator. Every control in the car is visible, clearly labeled and is distinct to the touch - at all times. The action isn't impeded by routine activity or maintenance (ex:battery change).

Because it can be trivially duplicated, this is minimally capable engineering. Yet automakers everywhere lack even this level of competence. By reasonable measure, they are poor at their job.

It's cost, not competence. These days making a touch screen is easier and cheaper than manufacturing and assembling lots of little buttons and knobs.

Is this true given all the chips modern cars have, all the programming that must be done, and all the complex testing and QA required for the multitude of extra function?

I would gladly gladly keep my AC, heat, hazards, blinkers, wipers, maybe a few other buttons and that's it. I don't need back cameras, lane assist, etc.

I find it hard to believe it's cheaper to have all the cameras, chips, and other digital affordances rather than a small number of analog buttons and functions.

In some countries it's a legal requirement to have a backup camera, which means you need a screen to display it, and hardware to render it.

I have always thought they should put the display for the backup camera behind the driver and facing the front of the car, so that it would be easily visible to a driver looking out the rear and rear-side windows while backing up.

That could be an accessibility issue for people with neck problems. I can see why general legislation put it at the front with everything else.