My rear view is mounted under the spoiler on the trunk and I haven’t had much problem with it in the rain or snow. I still though keep going back and forth between looking at the screen and looking out the back window instead of just relying on the camera. Don’t trust the camera and can’t see out the window so drives me a little nuts.
Mike, it was not my intent to imply that I thought cameras should replace rearview mirrors. They shouldn’t. My wish is to have them to supplement rearview mirrors.
However, I’m not certain that with a bit of design forethought they couldn’t be much better in adverse weather than mirrors. They wouldn’t have to be subject to rain running down them, like the rain running down your windows as you try to use your mirrors, and they could even include night vision.
There actually is a plan by some manufacturers to replace mirrors with cameras. My camera only kicks on when I’m in reverse. I like it…especially backing into a parking spot or backing out of my garage (I never know what my son left on the driveway).
I agree - I still want mirrors. I hope they can do better at preventing the lens from getting unusable when it’s raining or snowing. When it’s sunny and dry…it works great.
There are people that have difficulty walking and chewing gum at the same time, let alone driving a car and using the controls on the dashboard of a car.
I’m in agreement with you
I want mirrors, even if my car has a backup camera
As I see it, a backup camera should be used in conjunction with a mirror, not instead of it
Just as airbags aren’t meant to replace seatbelts. That’s why it’s called supplemental restraint system
Headrests in current cars are a mixed blessing. Between the higher headrests and seatbelts including shoulder belt restraints, whiplash is apt to be lessened. But the headrests do make it tougher to see out the rear window when backing up. As I have lived with the after effects of whiplash since a young age, I appreciate the better headrests. Just wish they were also transparent. 
A passenger side seatbelt was available in the 1950 Nash as an option. It wasn’t advertised as a safety feature but a comfort feature. It was particularly comfortable when the passenger let the seat back down to take a snooze while the car was travelling down the highway. With the seatbelt buckled, the sleeping passenger wouldn’t be tossed around. Headrests were offered in the Rambler beginning in 1958 or 1959. Again, these were promoted as comfort items as opposed to safety features. My parents bought a new 1960 Rambler. My dad insisted that seat belts be installed. The car also had a passenger side headrest. Theseatbelts and headrest proved to be safety features as well. The car was totaled when a semi plowed into the Rambler while stopped at a traffic light. The Rambler was totaled, but my mother and brother escaped injury.
I’m not going to say anything anymore about visibility because next thing you know they’ll come out with power retracting headrests and add another $1000 to the price tag.
My parents bought a new 1960 Rambler Custom. Seatbelts NAH! They didn’t even get the AM radio option. I inherited it in 1967. I can’t understand their wisdom in giving a teenager a “lay down” Rambler. I’m amazed I did not present them with a couple of dozen “Grandchildren”!!! I didn’t own anything with seatbelts until I bought a former wheelstand exhibition 1961 Ford Econoline pickup. Many years later when I was a member of Army Aviation I recognized those belts as UH-1 Huey helicopter passenger lap belts.
Actually, there is a model that has headrests (rear only) that fold down automatically if there is no one in the seat. Don’t remember which…
me, I remove rear headrests as I rarely have rear seat passengers.
edit:
This is one feature that could easily be fail-safe. It breaks, it just doesn’t fold down, except manually. For that matter, a manual one would be a cheap feature I would like.