Television is no longer anchored by broadcast schedules or coaxial cables. In 2024, the shift from traditional cable to streaming is no longer in motion—it’s complete. Nielsen reports that streaming accounts for 38.7% of total TV usage in the U.S., surpassing cable’s 29.6%. This tipping point has cemented digital platforms like Netflix, YouTube, and Disney+ as the primary conduits for entertainment consumption.
At the heart of this transformation are Smart TVs. No longer passive display devices, they’ve become the central entertainment hub in millions of homes, integrating content, connectivity, and interaction. Yet, while content delivery has evolved rapidly, many TV manufacturers remain stuck in the past—clinging to clunky, fragmented proprietary operating systems. It’s holding back innovation, user experience, and long-term value.
Switching from a Samsung smart TV to an LG or a Sony? Expect to relearn how to navigate menus, access settings, or launch popular apps. Proprietary operating systems—whether it’s Tizen, webOS, or My Home Screen—deliver wildly different interfaces, logic flows, and navigation schemes. This inconsistency offers no advantages for users. For people who simply want to watch Netflix or toggle between gaming inputs and live TV, the variety leads to confusion and wasted time rather than personalization or innovation.
Consumers shouldn’t need a new tutorial every time they buy a TV. Yet, hopping from one brand’s OS to another comes with a learning curve. Familiar features are often hidden behind unfamiliar icons, buried in menus, or presented in brand-specific formats. This isn't just a nuisance. It delays adoption of useful features like voice control or content casting because users must navigate unfamiliar interfaces just to find basic functionality.
Not all smart TV operating systems offer the same selection of apps. Amazon Prime Video might be natively supported on one platform but missing or buggy on another. HBO Max might arrive months late—or not at all. Developers must build and test versions of the same app for each OS variant, from Tizen and webOS to Vidaa and Vewd. Some platforms don't merit the investment in time or engineering. As a result, users are left without access to key content or stuck navigating less functional third-party versions.
High-end models from major manufacturers like Sony or LG might receive updates regularly, but budget-friendly models—especially those using lesser-known proprietary platforms—often ship outdated and stay that way. According to a 2023 report by Consumer Reports, nearly 45% of smart TVs in the mid-tier segment fail to receive any OS updates after two years. That leaves users stuck with unsupported apps, obsolete interfaces, and unpatched security vulnerabilities. The underlying cause? Every platform operates in isolation, with no shared update infrastructure or incentive to maintain long-term consistency.
Smart TVs run on a range of operating systems, each pushing a distinct strategy. Some lean into open ecosystems and app flexibility, others choose tight control and exclusivity. Here's a breakdown of the current players shaping the connected living room.
Scalability isn’t just about performance. It also means long-term viability, developer adoption, and cross-device harmony. Android TV and Google TV deliver all three. Google's Play Store gives manufacturers access to over 10,000 apps optimized for TVs, backed by a mature development framework (Android Jetpack) and regular SDK updates. This lowers entry barriers for content providers and encourages long-term investment in app maintenance.
In addition, these platforms benefit from Google's cloud infrastructure, AI-driven content recommendations, and support for Cast and Google Assistant across devices. Developers write once and deploy at scale—whether for Sony, Hisense, or Chromecast with Google TV. That level of reach doesn't exist with any proprietary OS.
Fire TV uses Fire OS, a heavily customized Android fork that Amazon controls end to end. Its power lies in tight coupling with Prime Video, Alexa, and the broader Amazon ecosystem. Fire TV integrates effortlessly with Echo devices, enabling hands-free control, skill-based enhancements, and deep smart home triggers.
Amazon prioritizes commerce-driven use cases. From shopping on-screen to voice-assisted reordering, Fire TV isn’t just a content platform—it's an Amazon engagement hub. However, this OS remains more closed off to third-party developers than Android-based solutions, limiting participation outside Amazon’s agenda.
Smart TVs from Samsung, LG, Hisense, and others each rely on separate app stores powered by their proprietary operating systems—Tizen, webOS, and VIDAA, respectively. This approach creates discrepancies in what’s available to users. For instance, while Netflix and YouTube usually make the cut across platforms, niche streaming services, regional content apps, and utility applications often don't. The result? Two users with different TV brands don't get the same content choices, despite both owning devices capable of running the same apps.
Developers often have to deal with platform-specific software development kits and testing environments, which bottlenecks deployment. When HBO Max launched in May 2020, Tizen users were forced to wait several weeks for a compatible update—a delay that never affected Apple TV or Android TV. These inconsistencies aren’t rare cases; they're the norm. Major platform updates or rebrandings like the shift from CBS All Access to Paramount+ routinely roll out late or partially on multiple smart TV OSes.
Supporting a proprietary OS means committing resources to maintain an app across fragmented ecosystems. Each codebase demands separate QA processes, update schedules, and support pipelines. According to a 2022 DevRelx survey, 58% of app developers listed platform fragmentation as a top barrier for launching apps on smart TVs. This constant juggling of SDKs, hardware quirks, and user interface constraints leads many development teams to prioritize larger ecosystems like Roku OS or Android TV—skipping over more isolated platforms entirely.
There’s also the risk that certain apps just never make it to a platform. Take Funimation’s catalog of anime content as an example. As of mid-2023, the app was fully available on Android TV, Roku, and Fire TV, but missing entirely from LG’s webOS and Hisense’s app store. The algorithm doesn’t simply “suggest” alternatives—it shows nothing at all. For users, the absence of choice isn’t a conscious decision; it’s baked into the OS and hidden behind branding and preloaded apps.
If an app isn’t on the store, it can’t be downloaded. If updates arrive late, features lag behind. And when developers opt out, users get left behind. The fragmentation of smart TV environments is directly responsible for inconsistent viewing experiences across households—something no streaming-first customer base will continue to tolerate indefinitely.
Switching between smart TVs from different manufacturers exposes a glaring reality: no two systems feel remotely alike. LG’s webOS uses a horizontal ribbon menu; Samsung’s Tizen favors a full-screen card layout; Hisense alternates between VIDAA and Google TV, often within the same product family. Each interface resembles a silo, designed in isolation, with no regard for learned user behavior or cross-brand coherence.
This fractured design language means users must relearn basic interactions—how to launch an app, adjust picture settings, or even return to the home screen—every time they use a different TV. In shared households or hospitality environments, the lack of UI standardization multiplies user confusion and frustration.
Integrated search functions frequently fall short of expectations. On Roku OS, universal search returns consistent cross-platform results, but proprietary systems like Vizio's SmartCast or LG's webOS often filter results only through owned services or prioritized partners. This limits discovery and degrades usability.
Recommendation engines also suffer. While Google TV aggregates personalized choices from multiple apps using real user behavior, most proprietary systems push content from their own or affiliated streaming platforms. Samsung Entertainment Hub, for instance, heavily promotes Samsung TV Plus programming even when usage data indicates preference for other services.
Device settings further complicate matters. HDR toggles, audio output, accessibility features—each brand hides or relabels fundamental functions. Some settings require navigating multiple submenus; others use unclear icons or nomenclature. There’s no logic shared from one layer to the next, forcing users to guess or consult a manual when personalization should be seamless.
Voice control, when executed well, transforms the TV experience. But implementation across proprietary systems lacks uniformity and cohesion. Samsung promotes Bixby by default, though many users opt for Alexa or Google Assistant. LG supports both Alexa and Google but often walls off deeper settings behind its own ThinQ voice engine.
As a result, identical commands produce wildly different outcomes depending on the ecosystem. "Switch to HDMI 2" might work intuitively on one system but prompt an error or an irrelevant search result on another. Even worse, some platforms don’t allow reassignment of the default assistant, locking users into inferior or less accurate systems.
Without a common standard for voice API access, every manufacturer implements half-measures, none of which achieve the natural, frictionless experience seen on mobile devices or smart speakers. This fragmentation strips voice interaction of its immediacy and reliability—two qualities on which it heavily relies to be effective.
Proprietary operating systems don't come cheap—especially when TV brands attempt to develop and sustain them over several product generations. This cost lands directly on the end user. Rather than focusing resources on panel quality, audio design, or build materials, TV makers allocate a portion of the budget to maintain their internal software stacks. The result? Higher retail prices without corresponding hardware improvements.
A TV priced at $1,000 could easily drop 10–15% in cost if it weren’t subsidizing a niche OS that offers limited app support and questionable long-term viability. Consumers essentially help finance experimental software platforms with every TV purchase.
Software support for proprietary TV systems is rarely comprehensive—or long-lasting. Most TVs receive just two to three years of minor updates, with major feature upgrades being nearly non-existent. After that, even basic app functionality like Netflix or YouTube can degrade or disappear entirely.
Unlike smartphones or mainstream operating systems with defined support cycles, users never know how long a proprietary TV OS will stay current. Developers pull support. App stores stagnate. Updates cease quietly.
Without a dependable upgrade path, a television investment becomes a short-term solution. Consumers who purchase TVs expecting five to seven years of usability often find the software outdated within half that time. And since smart features are deeply integrated into the UI, using an external streaming device doesn’t always compensate for missing or broken system functionality.
The fragmentation also limits longevity. Owners can’t rely on receiving the next version of their OS or accessing newer apps. They’re locked into a stagnant version until they replace the entire device.
Every proprietary OS launches with ambitious roadmaps, but only a few survive. Remember Mozilla’s Firefox OS or Samsung’s earlier Smart Hub versions? Consumers who invested in those ecosystems were left with abandoned interfaces, no app support, and the inconvenience of premature hardware replacement.
Purchasing a TV should not involve risk analysis akin to investing in a volatile startup. Yet that’s exactly what happens when brands underpin their devices with closed, unpredictable platforms.
Ask yourself: would you buy a car if its infotainment system could become non-functional within two years—and couldn’t be updated or replaced? For millions of smart TV owners, that’s not a hypothetical situation. It’s the standard experience.
Every proprietary smart TV operating system demands a tailored development effort. From Samsung’s Tizen to LG’s webOS and Vizio’s SmartCast, developers must allocate resources selectively. This fragmentation forces companies to prioritize based on market share, leaving marginal platforms lagging behind. The result? A highly uneven ecosystem where app performance varies wildly depending on the TV brand.
When a team needs to build and maintain five different versions of the same app to serve five different smart TV operating systems, efficiency vanishes. Codebases diverge, testing cycles expand, and continuous deployment pipelines clog with edge-case bugs. Some OSes don’t even support the media APIs or codec options required by modern video services, further increasing developer overhead.
For platforms like Roku or Google TV, developers enjoy established SDKs, reliable documentation, and consistent behavior across devices. Contrast this with smaller proprietary OSes where the development experience is inconsistent or poorly supported. According to a 2023 Developer Economics survey by SlashData, only 8% of developers prefer building for proprietary TV platforms outside of Android TV or Roku due to tooling and integration frustrations.
App teams usually assign the bulk of QA and enhancement efforts to top-performing ecosystems. That leaves apps on less popular proprietary OSes in a semi-abandoned state. Delayed feature rollouts, stale user interfaces, and unfixed bugs accumulate—while user reviews plunge. It's not negligence; it's economics. Prioritizing development on a fragmented field only benefits the largest players, leaving the rest underserved.
Cross-platform breakthroughs—like universal watchlists, shared user profiles, or seamless casting—require tight OS-level support. When every TV platform speaks its own language, developers can't build once and scale globally. Instead, they implement fractured workarounds, often sacrificing functionality or abandoning ideas altogether. Innovation ends up confined to OS-specific silos rather than reaching the broader ecosystem.
Streaming giants like Netflix, Hulu, and Disney+ operate in over 190 countries. To deliver consistent UX and feature parity, they need standardized environments. That becomes close to impossible with proprietary OSes, many of which have region-specific quirks or inconsistent support for global app standards. App teams often exclude certain platforms from new releases—delaying or denying feature launches entirely for millions of users worldwide.
So here’s a question worth asking: how many developers would choose to invest days debugging an issue on a platform with 2% market share when they can target Android TV or Roku and reach 40% in half the time?
Modern living rooms are no longer defined by furniture placement or cable boxes—they’re shaped by integrated, intelligent devices that function as a cohesive network. The smart TV, once a passive screen, now sits at the center of this ecosystem. Yet proprietary TV operating systems create bottlenecks in this connected experience.
Proprietary OS architectures fragment the user experience by limiting which devices can interact smoothly with the TV. While manufacturers aim to lock users into their own ecosystems, the reality plays out differently in homes. Most consumers mix brands. A Samsung phone, a Nest thermostat, Philips Hue lighting, and an Amazon Echo are often part of the same household. But a smart TV running Tizen or webOS struggles to unify these diverse devices.
Android TV and Google TV, by contrast, operate seamlessly with a broader range of smart home devices. They natively support integrations with Google Assistant, Nest products, and devices that adhere to the Matter standard. This results in a TV that doesn’t just receive streaming content—but responds to voice commands, dims the lights before a movie, and shows who’s at the door, all without friction.
Consider Matter, the open-source smart home connectivity standard backed by Amazon, Apple, Google, and others. It aims to eliminate compatibility headaches by allowing smart devices to speak a universal language. TVs should be ambassadors of this philosophy. Yet most proprietary systems have limited or delayed support.
Now contrast that with Android-based platforms. A Sony Bravia running Google TV, for instance, can control a smart thermostat through voice or automation routines—with no added hubs, no third-party apps required for basic functions.
Consumers expect devices to work together—without setup gymnastics. Voice assistants, smart home routines, and energy-saving automations only reach full impact when TVs no longer act as incompatible endpoints. Open platforms already pave this path. Proprietary OSes, by design, step off it.
So what happens when interoperability is ignored? Lighting schedules go out of sync. Security feeds are unavailable on-screen. Voice commands fail. The smart home doesn’t feel very smart anymore.
Unified, open platforms unlock the true potential of interconnected living. Dependency on closed systems ensures the opposite.
Security and privacy rarely feature on the box when shoppers pick a new smart TV, but they determine what happens behind the screen. Proprietary operating systems built by TV manufacturers lack the scale or sophistication to handle today’s cybersecurity threats. This gap exposes users to vulnerabilities that persist long after purchase.
Many proprietary systems—including those maintained by lesser-known or budget brands—fall behind on issuing timely security patches. Unlike Apple’s tvOS or Google TV, which run on robust update pipelines, niche platforms often push firmware irregularly, if at all. For instance:
The result: smart TVs stay connected to the internet, house personal data, and remain exposed to exploits for months, even years, after vulnerabilities become public knowledge. Malware targeting unpatched software doesn’t just remain a theoretical risk—it turns real with botnet infections like Mirai, which previously used vulnerable connected devices to orchestrate massive DDoS attacks.
Many smart TV makers bury extensive user tracking and data collection clauses deep within lengthy, hard-to-find privacy policies. Data shared often includes:
In 2020, Consumer Reports analyzed the privacy practices of major smart TV manufacturers and found widespread data collection transmitted across undisclosed third parties. Vizio, for example, faced a $2.2 million settlement with the FTC in 2017 for tracking consumers’ TV viewing data without their consent and selling it to advertisers.
When platforms are vertically controlled—from OS to data policy—there’s no independent oversight or user accountability. And without a centralized platform with transparent policies and security benchmarks, users depend entirely on each manufacturer’s willingness to protect them.
Who governs your data when every brand builds its own gate? That’s the question proprietary OSes refuse to answer. Until TV makers adopt open, audited platforms, the privacy cost of convenience will keep rising.
Android TV and Google TV have already demonstrated stability and scalability across a massive user base. Over 150 million devices worldwide use Android TV OS as of 2023, with manufacturers like Sony, TCL, and Hisense shipping products powered by it. High-volume adoption has validated the platform’s ability to scale and perform across diverse device types—from mid-range TVs to premium home theater systems.
Google TV, building on Android TV’s foundation, restructures the interface and integrates AI-based content recommendations. It doesn’t disrupt app compatibility, since both run on the same underlying architecture. This continuity ensures a predictable and supportable environment for developers and manufacturers alike.
Access to the Google Play Store solves the app availability problem that haunts proprietary operating systems. With over 10,000 apps tailored for Android TV—ranging from Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and Disney+, to more niche services like CuriosityStream or Crunchyroll—consumers don’t experience guesswork or gaps in core functionalities.
Unlike bespoke app stores that often slow-roll updates or lack core streaming apps entirely, Google Play delivers direct access to updates alongside smartphones and tablets. When providers like HBO or Hulu update their apps, users on Android TV don’t have to wait weeks or months for compatibility patches. They get updates when everyone else does.
Google’s infrastructure supports developers with mature APIs, full documentation, and tools like Android Studio. More than 3 million developers work within the Android ecosystem globally. That technical firepower consistently translates into faster bug resolution, more frequent innovation cycles, and more experimental features hitting the platform first.
Support extends beyond code. Marketing channels, monetization programs through Google Ads, and audience insights give independent developers opportunities rivaling those seen on mobile. No proprietary OS from a TV maker can offer that level of support structure.
For users outside the ecosystem of mainstream streaming, open-source platforms like Kodi, Plasma Bigscreen, or MythTV offer extreme customizability. Built primarily for enthusiasts, these alternatives let users tailor experiences down to file system preferences, input device customization, and skinable UI designs.
While these platforms won’t replace commercial streaming systems for the mainstream, they serve an essential role in the ecosystem—encouraging innovation, enabling digital freedom, and offering real alternatives where manufacturer-provided software falls short.
©2025 American TV. All Rights Reserved
Disclaimer: All rights reserved. AmericanTV.com is a website for research and comparison as such, falls under "Fair Use". AmericanTV.com does not provide directly phone, TV, and internet service. All trademarks, logos, etc. remain the property of their respective owners and are used by AmericanTV.com only to describe products and services offered by each respective trademark holder. The use of any third party trademarks on this site in no way indicates any relationship between AmericanTV.com and the holders of said trademarks, nor any endorsement of AmericanTV.com by the holders of said trademarks.
We are here 24/7 to answer all of your TV + Internet Questions:
1-855-690-9884
1-855-690-9884