MG4 Software Update Thread

[Rolfe]

No LKA switched off and stays off until I leave the driver's seat.

Do you keep your central screen on the same setting all the time, or do you switch it between light and dark modes?

 

[tsedge]

Its essential when you live in colder areas of the country, You can hit areas of very low temperatures where black ice is forming without any external indicators, having the ability to monitor what is happening to the outside temp becomes a very important safety issue.

Have we even established that the low temperature warning doesn't still show on cars without the temp display? Seems to me that could still work fine, taking away the safety argument.

My guess is we haven't, since we certainly haven't established that any of this was ever said by Miles in the first place or the context around it if it was.

But then given what people have said about him here, I'd certainly not engage in this thread if I were him, so we will probably never know.

 

[AndyL61]

Do you keep your central screen on the same setting all the time, or do you switch it between light and dark modes?

Always dark mode , I prefer it , have my phone the same so no changes.

 

[Rolfe]

The bug seems to be that when the central screen changes between light and dark mode, the LKA re-activates itself. Several people have talked about this, but I don't know if it's every car. I thought there might have been other triggers, but I'm not sure.

 

[AndyL61]

The bug seems to be that when the central screen changes between light and dark mode, the LKA re-activates itself. Several people have talked about this, but I don't know if it's every car. I thought there might have been other triggers, but I'm not sure.

Yes I tried it by changing the screen manually and yes it can change the LKA setting. But doesn't bother me as I always use dark mode which I find is fine during the day and I prefer.

 

[Rolfe]

Have we even established that the low temperature warning doesn't still show on cars without the temp display? Seems to me that could still work fine, taking away the safety argument.

My guess is we haven't, since we certainly haven't established that any of this was ever said by Miles in the first place or the context around it if it was.

But then given what people have said about him here, I'd certainly not engage in this thread if I were him, so we will probably never know.

I don't think that takes away the safety argument at all. A single boing (which I have never noticed; it's possible I haven't driven in temperatures as low as that since I've had the car) merely draws your attention to the temperature display. Relying on noticing a single bong as the temperature dips below 4 degrees but then having no other way the driver knows the temperature is freezing is inadequate. Once the temperature is down there it's important to keep an eye on it as you drive. There probably aren't going to be patches of black ice at 4 degrees. If it dips to -4 degrees you're going to have to be a lot more vigilant. You need to know that.

The car has the temperature sensor, obviously. It needs it to report the external temperature to the app, and to produce this bong. The temperature display works fine in R13. Can you think of one sensible reason why MG would have decided that the SE would not have this perfectly basic piece of kit, and then when discovering that the display had been enabled anyway, would be so vindictive as to take this away and issue a software update to deprive drivers of it?

Can you find any car produced in the past 10 years that doesn't have an external temperature display? It's as standard as having the time displayed.

The Trophy has all sorts of extra goodies to persuade people to buy it. Some will decide to go for it, others not. When we go for the SE we know we're not going to get heated seats or rear speakers or a satnav or that spoiler or a wireless charging pad or that false floor in the boot etc etc. Fine. It's all in the specs.

Are you really suggesting that in addition to all this, the MG designers got together and said, we haven't downgraded the SE enough. The people buying this car (for almost £30,000 in the case of the LR) don't deserve an external temperature readout, or a USB player that works, or to be able to turn off the auto-lock, or even to be able to turn off the radio so it stays off? We have the code for all of that and it would cost us nothing to implement it, but we won't do it?

That's ridiculous. I have no idea what Miles was smoking when he suggested that was the case. We know for a fact that one part of what he said was flat wrong. The temperature display is accurate. So, they won't give us an update that lets the USB player work, but they'll take the trouble to write extra code and issue an update to take away the temperature display they don't want us to have?

The problem here is defensiveness. There are bugs in the software. Some of these are possessed by both the SE and the Trophy, and some are unique to one or the other. They could be easily fixed. But rather than say oops, this isn't quite right, we get a load of guff about a car being deliberately intended not to have a very basic function, a function as normal as displaying the time, and which it is fully equipped to perform, but which is being withheld, apparently out of sheer spite.

I'm not buying it.

 

[Rolfe]

Yes I tried it by changing the screen manually and yes it can change the LKA setting. But doesn't bother me as I always use dark mode which I find is fine during the day and I prefer.

Yes, it's not a problem if you keep the screen on one setting or the other. But it does bug drivers who prefer to switch it. The SE doesn't have this bug. The screen can flip back and forward all it likes as we drive in and out of shadow, and the LKA stays off.

I just mentioned it as an example of a bug which is Trophy-specific.

 

[OriginalBigAl]

But someone had to update the code base (at R16) to remove that display indication ... the cost of hardware was already spent as the sensor is already there (and still is). And the cost to show the temperature had already been spent (as R13 shows it). So to remove showing it meant someone had to revise the code (i.e. spend money on labour) when R16 was created ... thus MG spent more money to remove something that they'd already spent money on displaying.

If you can't understand this then I'm out of this part of the conversation. I can't make it any simpler.

Apologies siteguru, I,m getting my models mixed up, I thought it was for the 23 model and not soft ware updates on the 22 . When you get something in your head and it just won,t budge.

 

[Deleted member 9692]

I have no idea what Miles was smoking when he suggested that was the case

Miles has been very helpful and informative in this forum. He has no obligation to post here or to answer questions but he often will. Your comments re him are coming across as disrespectful. You may have legitimate questions but comments like this, as @tsedge has pointed out are in no way helpful.

 

[SimonS]

Has it been established if the phase 2 cars physically have the temperature sensor? It’s possible that this has been removed as a cost saving (along with the 11kW charging) and has been removed from the phase 1 software for commonality.

 

[KH11]

I joined this forum to seek help and advice on my journey towards owning a MG4 and in my view that’s what a forum like this should be about. Not about having a pop at other members and being disrespectful. Which some members appear to be. So please get back to what I thought this forum was about helping and advising each other.

 

[siteguru]

Has it been established if the phase 2 cars physically have the temperature sensor? It’s possible that this has been removed as a cost saving (along with the 11kW charging) and has been removed from the phase 1 software for commonality.

R16 came out before the Phase 2 models came out, and R16 removes the temperature display.

Just saying.

 

[tsedge]

Has it been established if the phase 2 cars physically have the temperature sensor? It’s possible that this has been removed as a cost saving (along with the 11kW charging) and has been removed from the phase 1 software for commonality.

Very little has been established, that is part of the problem. You raise a good point though, this is possible.

 

[Rolfe]

I don't see how it's possible that the temperature sensor has been removed in the phase 2 cars. Quite apart from the utter insanity of such a move, nobody has reported that scanning one of these cars with the app fails to return an outside temperature reading.

There's also the issue of the audible warning which I'm told happens to alert the driver to potentially freezing road conditions. This is a safety issue. If the car has no sensor, then it won't be able to provide such a warning.

The idea that MG would add a rear wiper and a centre head rest to these cars (with a fanfare of publicity) but clandestinely remove the outside temperature sensor to claw back money (and not mention it) is ridiculous. It's well beyond the limit of expected incompetence.

 

[Rolfe]

Miles has been very helpful and informative in this forum. He has no obligation to post here or to answer questions but he often will. Your comments re him are coming across as disrespectful. You may have legitimate questions but comments like this, as @tsedge has pointed out are in no way helpful.

I don't suffer deliberate misinformation gladly, no matter how helpful the informant has been in other situations.

 

[Deleted member 10041]

I don't suffer deliberate misinformation gladly, no matter how helpful the informant has been in other situations.

To be fair not suffering misinformation is one thing, accusing him of smoking something is a bit of a leap.
As has been said he always does his best to support and answer members questions.
It hasn't even been established that he actually even said what was apparently said.

 

[tsedge]

I don't suffer deliberate misinformation gladly, no matter how helpful the informant has been in other situations.

I don't suffer deliberate attacks on people gladly, especially when the facts have not been established (misinformation?), no matter how helpful the contributor has been in other situations.

 

[Deleted member 9692]

I don't suffer deliberate misinformation gladly, no matter how helpful the informant has been in other situations.

Your perogative. Lets see what the mods think of your posts.

 

[Rolfe]

To be fair not suffering misinformation is one thing, accusing him of smoking something is a bit of a leap.
As has been said he always does his best to support and answer members questions.
It hasn't even been established that he actually even said what was apparently said.

That wasn't intended to be serious, more of a light-hearted quip. Of course I don't think he's smoking anything. (I think he's reflexively defending MG rather than acknowledging they made a mistake.)

 

[Rolfe]

I don't suffer deliberate attacks on people gladly, especially when the facts have not been established (misinformation?), no matter how helpful the contributor has been in other situations.

It seems to be established that he said the temperature sensor on the SE never worked, and only reports random numbers. Every single person on this forum with an SE which is on R13 knows that that is not true. The temperature reported appears to be perfectly correct. (It's also hard to see how that claim squares with the reporting of the external temperature from the car-scanning facility in the app. How come that's correct, but the car can't report the correct temperature on the infotainment screen? But of course, it does report the correct temperature, as we can all see.)

I am getting irritated by this repeated tendency from various quarters to try to tell SE owners that obvious bugs in the SE software are deliberately intended by MG. It's the same thing as telling owners that the warped undertray is a characteristic of the car, indeed intentional. Or that the aircon noise is "a characteristic", no matter how clattery and abnormal it sounds. Rather than admit that something is wrong, or a mistake has been made, we're fobbed off with the post-hoc excuse that it's intentional.

In particular, Trophy owners who take a delight in sneering at SE owners that the "base model" isn't intended to have a working USB player, or indeed an internal temperature display, know your place, are just plain annoying. This is a car that costs almost £30,000 in the LR version. It has an astonishing array of electronic capabilities, much more than I've ever had in a car before. To downgrade the USB player so that it's almost useless in the SE, and to deprive SE owners of a temperature display, when both of these things cost nothing, suggests a level of vindictive nastiness on the part of MG that I don't honestly suspect them of.