comment: >
context: I remember I saw a picture somewhere here which showed a gear selector that was just a knob on the dash and it looked like a control for the heater or the radio >
  
  Interesting question!  I don't disagree.  My first "car" (actually an old Dodge pickup truck) had a column shifter and it was great.  There was nothing to prevent someone from riding in the middle of the bench seat.  Which, of course, was the only seat.  There were no extended cabs in those days.
  That being said, a mechanic once told me that the linkages in column shifters were more prone to breaking.  Of course, in the early 1960's, cars/trucks were not rolling computers. The moving parts were mechanical.  And many families had only one vehicle, if that.  They were expensive.  People would not have liked weak components.
  Maybe, as vehicles evolved to include more gadgets on the steering column, it became unpractical to have the gear shifting mechanism there too.  Maybe column shifters became unpopular because it was seen as much cooler to have "four on the floor."  Maybe there is little demand for column shifters, and car manufacturers are simply catering to the larger market.
  I look forward to reading other comments about this. >
  
  Does the console shifter dig into your ribs or something? >
  
  Yes it tickles my pancreas. No but it's wasting space and nowadays it costs a fortune to replace when it breaks cuz for some reason they all have to be electric or have some electric motors and sensors attached >
  
  Odds are that a console shifter in a modern car isn't even a mechanical device, but just a really big "switch" that could have been located anywhere >
  
  Why not use push-button transmission? It's been around for decades.    
  From what I've read, centre consoles take up a lot of space almost solely because the more restricted the driver is the better the car's safety rating.