coolnesh

I would personally consider it. It is important to me, even if I might not use it on a daily basis. But the fact that I can whenever I want to give me the piece of mind.
However, another key feature that comes with the nav is the back up camera.... which I use almost everyday. I use it to park my car in the garage, as I have outlined a marking on the floor and use it to know that I will have the optimum space in the garage.
Also, if you are in nyc or parallel parking its very helpful in getting it right... there is a huge comfort and convenience aspect to it.
I also love the clean look, rather than have something dangling from the windshield and diminish the exquisite interiors.
Plus you get some addition features even if they might be minor.

bottom line is if you can afford it go get it.
it offers a lot of intangible benefits ... which when used... cannot really be quantified in tangible terms!

scottacus

If you are buying I would strongly recommend nav. You will recoup most of the cost and card without nav sometimes have a harder time selling at resale.

And of course for 2010 the nav is significantly improved and will have just about any major feature you can find in the better portable nav systems including text-to-speech (reads street names), live traffic, 3D city views including buildings, etc.

The convenience of having the radio muted while nav instructions are read, plus the next-turn instructions in the driver information display really make the system nice.

Not to mention the better placement of the MMI controls, backup camera, bigger MMI screen, and color driver info display.

dk1

Touch screen actually indicates a bad design. It is much better to use a controller than to try to poke fingers into a tiny screen while driving. Most luxury cars these days have a controller to operate Nav.

coolnesh

I totally agree with you... the touch screen is a deterrent and not ergonomic. just my opinion which resonates with yours too.

1200RT-P

I think "bad design" is a little much ... VW's new RNS-510 navigation is great with touch screen, and some features make touch screen much easier to use. I do agree, however, that tactile keys make for better use while driving though.

Toecutter

I like touch screens. Even better though, would be a good voice recognition system. "Find beret shop." "Find biker bar." "Find hospital."

Ryan1524

In most cases, I think Touch screens are awesome. I have no problems typing on my iPhone as quickly as I do on my BlackBerry. But in a car, it's nice to be able to keep your eyes on the road and just use tacticle feedback to know where you're going.

In Audi's case, the joystick, clicky-scroll combo is perfect. If you're used to it enough, you can probly navigate the entire thing blind.

Toecutter

It's nice to keep your eyes on the road but the Audi MMI system already draws your attention away from the road. In a simpler car all controls can operate by feel. For instance, air-conditioning gets colder by turning the **** all the way counterclockwise and hotter by turning it all the way clockwise. Somewhere in between is warm. In the Audi however, you have to look at the MMI screen or at the digital readout down below to see where your setting is. For this reason I don't think having a touchscreen navigation unit would draw one's attention away from the road anymore than the MMI already does. I don't necessarily think that it's a good thing though.

Ryan1524

Yes, but for the A/C, you know that one click is 0.5C. I prefer this to a very vague analogue placement. As for the MMI, yes, it's very distracting, with Sirius, it's not too bad. But when I'm trying to look for a song in my iPod, it's very dangerous.

I need to mount my iPhone somehow in the car so I can use their very robust voice commands. Too bad the AUDI MMI doesn't relay the Voice controls into the iPhone.

Toecutter

It is overly analytical to think that if you are too hot then you want the cabin 0.5°C cooler. If you feel too hot then you automatically know that you want it "a little cooler or a lot cooler." Comfort is on a continuum rather than on a graded scale. Our bodies are not digital. What has happened is that you have sensed how much of a change in temperature would make you comfortable, then your brain has noted how much of a degree change it takes to become comfortable. You've added the element of digital analysis to it. If you did not have a thermometer available, would you still be able to tell if you were comfortable or not? You do not need to know the exact temperature in order to know if you are comfortable or not. How do I know all this? Because I am one smart mother Fokker.