The phone doesn't have aspect ratio flexibility AFAIK, i.e. it only supports either the SD aspect ratio (4:3) or the HD aspect ratio (16:9). Any other aspect ratios would lead to stretched UI in either one of the directions, and I don't think MB is doing it. Instead MB might just be scaling without altering the aspect ratio and filling the remaining area with black bars and that hardcoded AA logo overlay.

CarPlay is however different in this aspect and supports four different resolutions at three different aspect ratios.

• 800px × 480px 5:3
• 960px × 540px 16:9
• 1280px × 720px 16:9
• 1920px × 720px 8:3

CarPlay in fact supports 1920x720 as a native resolution, and might be one of the reasons why MB decided to build support for this.

 

@Tuxdude well said. It's like we have been saying for a long time: the onus is on Google. MB just offers a screen. Google just doesn't care to fill it because candidly, most rich Americans use iPhones so a larger market to go after. What we need is for Toyota to offer MB's screen resolution and we'll be sound as a pound.

 

People who think this is provider issue (Google) are definitely not software engineers. Google can only provide the video but cannot dictate where that video gets displayed on the head unit display. The consumer (Mercedes) is making that decision and they have made a design error that does not allow wide-screen display for Android Auto. So we need to beat up on Mercedes, not Google.

 

Right. If Google was the problem, then we wouldn't be seeing the 1920x720 (same as MB) AA screens on Lexus and others. We're only asking for the same thing some others already have, and have had for a while.

 

You expect MB to update an end-of-life product that is being replaced with totally new hardware and software in the next model year E class? Dream on.

 

I may not /expect/ it, but considering I and many others will be using my brand new 2020 car for at least the next 3-4 years, it sure would be nice, and it ain't that hard! There's a LOT of customers out there that would be pleased. Of course, they may not care about that.

 

In my 50+ years of driving MB vehicles MB has never retrofitted models to upgrade functions - hardware or software.
The only thing they do now is to upgrade navigation maps for a limited period of time. One must cite a specific problem to get a software upgrade under warranty. Otherwise, it is what you bought is what you get. With technology I do not expect free or paid upgrades. I totally agree with MB upgrade philosophy.

 

Not sure which exact years and models but I've seen CarPlay / AA retrofitted to one year earlier models even if the car did not come with it since the hardware supported it I believe. One of the 2016/2017 models IIRC, but this is more an exception than a norm.

There is no doubt that this is an MB issue for choosing to implement AA on the headunit that way. It would have been very well possible for MB to plan ahead and support both non-widescreen and widescreen AA options, and write code to handle it. The negotiation protocols are designed to handle these capabilities correctly (i.e. only phone supports widescreen but not headunit, only headunit supports widescreen but not the phone, etc.). However in the interest of costs (R&D costs money), MB would have very well decided to invest these costs for later year models since it gives customers one more reason to upgrade to these later year models.

I like MB's cars mechanical aspects, but not a big fan of their software development, look at the mbusa website configurator - it's as if some college intern coded this during their summer internship. MB Connect app and service is another joke, and they have been gradually removing features from this app. The browser MB Connect experience is much worse.

Because of all these reasons, I feel MB will support widescreen AA but I doubt we are going to see it in our current year cars. 2021+ year models would be my best guess.

 

So, bottom line is, We Get What We Get, or rather We Get What MB Decides to Give Us, and we should be happy that, unlike BMW, at least we get /some/ version of Android Auto.

 

Actually, you get exactly what you decide to purchase. If full screen AA is that important to you, buy something other than MB, BMW, ...

 

Not really. 99% of MB purchasers will never visit this forum, will never know their traffic and other features will just "go away" and will never know a full screen AA implementation is available elsewhere (or that it isn't with MB). In some ways, I'm sorry I've visited here; there are so many bad things I've heard about that would /never/ happen with a Hyundai or Chevrolet, that you have to wonder what the heck MB thinks about, or where they come up with "The Best or Nothing". Don't get me wrong, I'm still anticipating getting my ordered wagon, but that star has lost a lot of its luster already.

 

Don't you review the vehicle's features and specifications before making a purchase? I certainly do, even if I've never seen a similar one. If you don't, it is your mistake.

I have a BMW, Hyundai and Volkswagen in my stable and have experienced similar issues with all of them. Believe me, it happens with every brand.

 

Sure I do. I've probably viewed every video and review available for the E, downloaded the DOG, downloaded and read through the owners manual 3 times. Heck, my spreadsheet of car comparison specs & features has 10 pages! Funny, though, not one time was it mentioned that navigation traffic would somehow just go away, that AA wasn't what it is on other cars, that its ride would somehow turn to concrete, that I'd have to pay $500 for an oil change or that the runflat tires would explode at the sight of a pothole. ;-)

 

I saw that AA wasn't "full screen" before I purchased the car. IIRC an image was in a E class feature document. The sales rep also went over maintenance requirements and cost, each feature and subscription in detail before I factory ordered the car. The 3 year Live Traffic subscription was also well documented. The ability to renew a subscription be it Merrcedes me, mbrace, nav updates or Live Traffic is not included.

My sales person does this with every vehicle I purchase because many of them are new models, sight unseen in the US (such as my order for an EQC400).

 

Other automakers that offer widescreen infotainment have the same problem with Android Auto not filling the screen. Does that imply the problem (solution) rests with Google?

 

Once again, no. Many manufacturers send more periodic headunit software updates and all of them have the ability to support widescreen AA if their screen is really widescreen (i.e. at least 1280x720).

Note that the phone's software is generic as per the AA standard, and the headunit negotiates as per this standard. If the headunit doesn't understand widescreen AA, there is nothing Google or the phone can do to fix this.

What you're rather referring to is that many manufacturers have lower resolution screens and they won't support the widescreen UI. I've seen these lower res screens in many of my rental cars - Dodge, Nissan, Ford, Honda.

The MB infotainment in the current gen E class (and other newer 2019/2020 models with wider screens) supports HD resolutions and is indeed widescreen capable as per the specs, but the software on the headunit is not utilizing this capability unless MB fixes this.

 

You're lucky you have a sales person like that. But then you've probably acquired a great relationship over many years.

I didn't know the EQC400 could even be ordered! Looks like a great vehicle.

 

To contribute to the answer to my own question, here's a link to a Google support community that says it is not a Google issue (after v.4.1). Sadly, I agree that it's highly unlikely Mercedes will do anything more.

https://support.google.com/androidau.../8844203?hl=en

 

I think this thread should be closed. There is no point in beating a dead horse. We all know that Mercedes will not update the Android Auto head unit to support windscreen, and for very good business reason. Can you imagine how much it would cost Mercedes to update thousands of head units? And cost could even get worse if a bug gets introduced in the update that has to be fixed. As a software engineer, I don't think offering an update for widescreen support would be a good idea. There is no scenario I can think of where this would result in a good return on investment for Mercedes.

 

Uh, basically nothing. A few hours of programming and compiling, testing, and then updating the software, which /supposedly/ can be done automatically. We know the hardware is capable of it.

 

Mercedes would have to make the desired software changes for widescreen support, build and qualify the software update for the combination of every car model, and market.

With software releases, regression testing is one of the key aspects. There is the saying that if nothing is broken, why fix it? In other words, making a change in software always has the potential to impact other things which where working earlier. Sure there are ways to make a very specific and narrow change in software to limit this, but it is not always possible and you need good software engineering expertise to make such wise decisions.

It is cost nevertheless in terms of Software engineering headcount, and there are priorities among projects that headcount is funded for. Higher level executive make such decisions on which projects are a priority, and how much additional funding need to be secured for them when they plan each quarter.

With newer models, this cost is built-in (i.e. the overhead is minimal) in the R&D for launching that newer model.

 

BTW, here is the widescreen AA UI rendered on my tablet running Head Unit Reloaded (i.e. basically acting as the head unit) with my phone projecting Android Auto:

 

You have no idea of the amount of effort that goes into a software update. Proposed changes must be enumerated and evaluated before a software update plan is even created and vetted. After an plan is approved, code must be written and tested. Then integration testing takes place which is the most complex and time consuming. Even a simple change can take weeks or months before the "package" is ready to be folded into the software distribution system.

I was a software development engineer for decades before going into consulting. I've seen too many "one line of code" changes break an entire system.

 

Well, I have a /small/ idea, having my own software company, selling programs since 1998 to every state and over 50 countries. That's outside of my work, retired in 2010, but writing software there for over 15 years prior to that.

I'm well aware of the complexities of coding and making changes. I also know that simply changing resolution is normally a quite simple thing.

But you're right: MB probably isn't going to bother with us. Especially if we don't even really expect them to. It appears that is their way, which is really a shame. I've never before seen a place where the customers make excuses for the product and why it can't be made right, rather than ask for improvements. Assuming anyone from MB frequents here, they know you don't expect much at all, so why spend the time.

 

IMO it is typical in the auto industry that firmware/software changes are kept to a minimum due to several factors including short product sales cycle (12 mo), short model life (< 4 yr), regulatory exposure, etc. The bottom line is that to get new features, buy the next model. You are about my age or a few years younger so you probably remember when people bought new cars every year. As prices and reliability increased the purchase cycle extended to 2 years, ... Now the lease/purchase sweet spot is 3 or 4 years. The current E class infotainment system has lasted 4 model years. BTW there have been 19 mid-size (E class) generations since 1946 with another generation due perhaps as soon as late next year.