[kwstas]

> "Truly an inspired design if that is the case" - it's not the case.

I only read the article and some commenters here saying the windows break. The commenter above provides a reason for it that you say is not true. I stand by my comment, that if it is the case the design is "inspired"

>"Rear doors either do not have an emergency release" - you mean like every coupé ever built? Since when were you protesting coupés? Rear doors not only do not have to have manual releases, but don't even have to exist.

Don't most (all ?) of these cars have rear doors? What do coupés have to do with this? Convertibles don't have a roof but I would expect it in a sedan. If the doors exist there sould be a release that works in the case of this electrcal malfunction.

>"lack and/or ambiguity of signifiers" - the front manual release handle is not only not ambiguous, but is far more prominent than the electric release button, so most people with no experience with the car pull it instead of the button.

I expect this is the case for one model? The article has 2 cases of people that own these cars (a model y I think) and could not find the manual release without reading the manual or calling someone. Moreover the confusion you are describing (using the emergency rather than the regular release button) is exactly what ambiguous signifiers result in. This is a design failure as well.

I agree that unlatching the doors in a crash is a part of the crash sequence in many modern cars but these cases are not about crashes. Sudden power loss or an electrical malfunction should trigger the unlatching of doors and they seem to not. Jaws of life would not be a prudent way to get out of your car in these occasions.