What is the best TV in motion option

[AVATT]

Originally Posted by JCL

While I am not incensed at your pontifications, I have a question. Why would you assume that those of us who think vehicles (especially BMWs) are for driving, and who think that TV in motion is a really dumb idea, would think that it is safe to play with a nav screen or iDrive or tend to the video programming of children in the back seat while driving? Of course they are all distractions, but at least one of these activities is illegal in many jurisdictions. Hopefully we will soon come out of the era of vehicles being configured as living rooms, media rooms, and babysitters. Until then, stay safe.

JCL:

In response please note:

Your statement guised as a question is based upon a false premise, answers itself in part and is, I believe, intellectually dishonest.

First, I made no pontificating statement, as defined by any reasonable definition. I merely replied as to why I felt your pontification - i.e. dogmatic, unsolicited opinioin which failed to address the query as to how to implement a video system but rather offered your personal view as to why you feel these systems are stupid and by implication, those who install them - was misguided. I also note that the very post above to which I am replying continues to pontificate with your statements guised as a question.

Second, I made no assumption, hence my use of the term "some." I stand by my statement. There are some who do not equate the inherent (and therefore obvious) dangers of the I-Drive with video. They are all equally dangerous, the very point of the second half of my posting.

Third, I did and do draw an inference from your and others posts. You were silent in your original post as to the danger of the I-Drive and only felt compelled to provide your opinion when someone raised the question of implementing video in motion. Moreover, I have not found any other instance in this forum in which you raised the issue of the dangers of the I-Drive or any other distractions. You therefore, appeared only concerned with video as opposed to all distractions. Were is/was your opinion/judgment/concerns on all other equally dangerous distractions? Finally, I note that your above post refers to video as "a really dumb idea" and the I-Drive only as a safety issue. You continue to separate the two. I again infer that you do not believe that BMW is "really dumb" or you would not have purchased the vehicle. Either that or by your own definition you intentionally engage in dumb behavior by purchasing and operating a BMW with I-Drive.

Fourth, you fail to discern one of my points that not all who implement these interfaces do so to watch video while operating the vehicle. I have no such intention.

For these reasons I find your posts on this topic to be intellectually dishonest.

[AVATT]

Originally Posted by Penguin

It might have something to do with the post starting the thread consisting of the single sentence:

"i have just purchased a 09/10 xdrive35d and want to know the best option for tv in motion."

OK, I suppose I could have been clearer and stated for the "DRIVER watching video in motion." Neither the originating poster or myself intend video in motion for that purpose.

[Penguin]

Whatever.

[AVATT]

Originally Posted by Penguin

Whatever.

Wow. You are all over this thread offering your opinion, mis-educating the reader and serving to correct others. Apparantly however, when given a dose of your own thats all you come up with ... pathetic.

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by AVATT

Wow. You are all over this thread offering your opinion, mis-educating the reader and serving to correct others. Apparantly however, when given a dose of your own thats all you come up with ... pathetic.

"You are all over this thread"

My three short messages, adding up to a total of 9-10 sentences, including the quotes of others?

You seem to have a problem.

I simply do not see the utility of turning the thread into a discussion of legal theory and quoting of legal precedents, etc. I certainly do not feel I was miseducating anyone, but obviously you do. At some point, the discussion becomes pointless.

If you are looking for an endless argument, I suggest you try a bar.

P.S. I stand by my original post:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I assume it is illegal in most states. In Illinois:

"HB 960Mandates that a vehicle equipped with visual media technology cannot be operated if the technology is on and the screen is visible from the driver's seat. Which means if someone has one of those video screens to play movies in the car, it better not be in the driver's line of sight. "

Not to be overly dramatic, but it would not be good if the EMT's or Policeman pulling you out of a wrecked X5 noticed Batman playing on the display, particularly if someone died.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Illinois General Assembly - Full Text of Public Act 094-0185

Believe it, or don't believe it, but I have no interest in further argument back and forth as I don't see any value added to either myself or other readers.

Whatever.

[JCL]

Originally Posted by AVATT

JCL:

In response please note:

Your statement guised as a question is based upon a false premise, answers itself in part and is, I believe, intellectually dishonest.

First, I made no pontificating statement, as defined by any reasonable definition. I merely replied as to why I felt your pontification - i.e. dogmatic, unsolicited opinioin which failed to address the query as to how to implement a video system but rather offered your personal view as to why you feel these systems are stupid and by implication, those who install them - was misguided. I also note that the very post above to which I am replying continues to pontificate with your statements guised as a question.

Second, I made no assumption, hence my use of the term "some." I stand by my statement. There are some who do not equate the inherent (and therefore obvious) dangers of the I-Drive with video. They are all equally dangerous, the very point of the second half of my posting.

Third, I did and do draw an inference from your and others posts. You were silent in your original post as to the danger of the I-Drive and only felt compelled to provide your opinion when someone raised the question of implementing video in motion. Moreover, I have not found any other instance in this forum in which you raised the issue of the dangers of the I-Drive or any other distractions. You therefore, appeared only concerned with video as opposed to all distractions. Were is/was your opinion/judgment/concerns on all other equally dangerous distractions? Finally, I note that your above post refers to video as "a really dumb idea" and the I-Drive only as a safety issue. You continue to separate the two. I again infer that you do not believe that BMW is "really dumb" or you would not have purchased the vehicle. Either that or by your own definition you intentionally engage in dumb behavior by purchasing and operating a BMW with I-Drive.

Fourth, you fail to discern one of my points that not all who implement these interfaces do so to watch video while operating the vehicle. I have no such intention.

For these reasons I find your posts on this topic to be intellectually dishonest.

The discussion you are quoting was a month ago. A poster other than you suggested we split the illegal activity from the activity that purely distracts from driving, and I did so, a month ago. You chose not to respond to that post, but instead quoted my original post. Hard to accept your charge of intellectual dishonesty given your style of responses. For the record, I think that anything that distracts the driver is a negative, given the importance of paying attention. Yes, I understand the concept of scanning the instruments. I also carry my cell phone in the trunk, as I don't want the distraction of answering it while driving. That is described in previous posts outside of this thread. I think the nav system should be disabled unless the vehicle is in park. That is also discussed outside this thread. You could search and find those posts, but I think the search function has more capability for members instead of guests. That implication there is that you may want to join the board and hang around.

Another question: Did you put a TV in your M5 as well?

[AVATT]

Originally Posted by JCL

The discussion you are quoting was a month ago. A poster other than you suggested we split the illegal activity from the activity that purely distracts from driving, and I did so, a month ago. You chose not to respond to that post, but instead quoted my original post. Hard to accept your charge of intellectual dishonesty given your style of responses. For the record, I think that anything that distracts the driver is a negative, given the importance of paying attention. Yes, I understand the concept of scanning the instruments. I also carry my cell phone in the trunk, as I don't want the distraction of answering it while driving. That is described in previous posts outside of this thread. I think the nav system should be disabled unless the vehicle is in park. That is also discussed outside this thread. You could search and find those posts, but I think the search function has more capability for members instead of guests. That implication there is that you may want to join the board and hang around.

Another question: Did you put a TV in your M5 as well?

JCL:

Points accepted. I often travel to remote places with limited internet access so I dont have the opportunity to regularly visit the board and to timely respond to queries. I believe that there are a multiplicity of ditractions including turn signal stalks, windshield wipers, radio buttons, 8 track to cassette to dvd players. Somehow however, its the video in motion which seems to draw the largest voice of shall I say "concern." You at least are living by your concern by placing the cell in the trunk etc, and tho I disagree with you, that is commendable.

I did not put a TV in the M5 or a any type of entetainment system. To be clear, I do not have TV capability in the X either, just a variety of different video sources. There isnt a decent aftermarket rear seat entertainment system for the E60, IMO. Probably wouldnt put one in anyway. The X is the primary children hauler.

[AVATT]

Originally Posted by alewifebp

I'm personally not interested in TV in motion. Rather, I'd just like to play video from my iPod Touch on my iDrive screen while at rest. I don't have the DVD changer or premium audio, but I do have the iPod kit. Would this $40 option allow me to do that somehow?

Sorry for the late post. The answer is no, you would need the BMW56 CAN which runs from $300 to $600, in addition to the cable.

[AVATT]

Originally Posted by Penguin

"You are all over this thread"

My three short messages, adding up to a total of 9-10 sentences, including the quotes of others?

You seem to have a problem.

I simply do not see the utility of turning the thread into a discussion of legal theory and quoting of legal precedents, etc. I certainly do not feel I was miseducating anyone, but obviously you do. At some point, the discussion becomes pointless.

If you are looking for an endless argument, I suggest you try a bar.

P.S. I stand by my original post:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I assume it is illegal in most states. In Illinois:

"HB 960Mandates that a vehicle equipped with visual media technology cannot be operated if the technology is on and the screen is visible from the driver's seat. Which means if someone has one of those video screens to play movies in the car, it better not be in the driver's line of sight. "

Not to be overly dramatic, but it would not be good if the EMT's or Policeman pulling you out of a wrecked X5 noticed Batman playing on the display, particularly if someone died.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Illinois General Assembly - Full Text of Public Act 094-0185

Believe it, or don't believe it, but I have no interest in further argument back and forth as I don't see any value added to either myself or other readers.

Whatever.

Look Penguin, I was not going to respond to your last post and was content to let it go, especially since you stated you did not wish to engage the subject anymore. However, after you posted that comment you failed to abide by your own words and deemed to continue the "discussion" by editing your own post and continuing the issue. Therefore I will respond as follows:

"I simply do not see the utility of turning the thread into a discussion of legal theory and quoting of legal precedents, etc."
-Really? That is the ultimate in hypocrisy. It was YOU that first saw fit to advise the reader that in Illinois, video in motion is illegal and in so doing incorrectly quoted the proposed legislation rather than the actual enacted statute. It was YOU that first saw fit to correct Berniac and suggest that whether video was playing in a car would be decided by a preponderence of evidence in a civil suit, completly misunderstanding the issues at bay in such a matter. I politley attempted to clarify your misunderstanding. It was YOU that was the smart a** in first quoting me and then pointing out the original posters comments as if I didnt understand it. It was YOU that did not in any way respond to the original poster's technical query but rather chimed in with your unsolicited personal opinion on the efficacy of such systems.

"I have no interest in further argument back and forth as I don't see any value added to either myself or other readers."
- While you arrogantly presume to speak for the readers, I will let them decide for themselves as to who's posts are value added, mine which actually responded specifically to the posters technical q's or yours which offer unsolicited opinion, attempt to incorrectly correct others and chime in with smart a** comments which add nothing to this Board.

"You seem to have a problem."
- Yes, its posts like yours. I suggest you also take a look at yourself and ask why you feel the need to offer your unwanted opinions and try to correct others.

"Whatever."
-A petty chick term.

[jigaro]

This penguin guy, gave me a hard time as well, for some reason!!