This is essentially what I've done. The TV has never been connected to the Internet and my Apple TV drives everything. I would still have payed 2x to support a good dumb TV project and would love to do so in the future.
It was great for two days and then it downloaded an update that absolutely wrecked the interface. What was smooth and snappy and good enough for me now moves at a snails pace and the tv is practically unusable even after a factory reset.
Opening the menu takes 2.5 seconds from button push to response on a good day for no reason other than vizio must have decided it was time for me to buy a new tv.
I used to like their brand. Now I'll never buy another one again.
With Apple TV, you can nip that in the bud. Yes, Apple TV has its own quirks but it’s nowhere near as hostile as built in “functionality” that these tvs try to provide.
And not say that streaming services have every incentive to keep the Apple TV apps improving compared to the tv app itself.
It’s just an overall better experience.
But when it comes to general conversation (and this context), yes it's the same. Unless you are actually using a niche setup of local streaming and the Apple TV box is just a nice interface you keep offline - don't know how well that works. For everyone else, they are just avoiding overlapping TV services, as relying on Apple or Google or Amazon is falling into the same traps.
Worst case, Apple jumps the shark… you can just unplug it. You at least get to keep the display.
That difference in power is felt quite a lot in the user experience.
So it still sounds like a software problem to me.
That would be fine if they were rendering to a 720p screen or had much more simplistic menus like the those found on most A/V receivers, but they’re usually running recent-ish Android or something similar, which has fancy graphics and animations all over the place designed for newer devices which make that hardware choke at the 4K resolution that the majority of TVs now ship with. Exacerbating this are the terrible lowest-bidder smart TV apps which are written terribly.
TV manufacturers will never ship an OS more suitable for the hardware though, because they’re concerned that it will make the TV look less modern than competing TVs. They also won’t ship better hardware because that’d cut $5 per unit off of their margins. As such, it’s best to just write off integrated “smarts” and plug in a streaming box that’s not so anemic.
We were staying at one just a few days ago that had a cheap Samsung TV. The UI latency was so horribly laggy that simply clicking an arrow on the remote to try to navigate to the next menu would take up to 10 seconds to finally register on screen. It was also variable, meaning some button presses only took 1-2 seconds to respond, but some took 10 seconds, and if you pressed more than once you'd end up with a whole bunch of your delayed button presses registering at once and taking you to a menu option you didn't want.
Sad to say, but state of the art in these Android menu systems is horrible latency, most likely because the UI devs are building in new javascript features that run horribly slow on older ARM processors and they just don't give any F's about the actual user experience or testing...
A TV with Samsung MySmart™ HomeOS Android UltraCrap Edition is not the same as an AppleTV, if you care about things like, I don't know... consistent framerate? No random crashes? Bearable UI latency?
Similarly how Apple CarPlay is not the same as car manufacturers' sorry-ass homegrown infotainment trash software.
iPhones are still spying on you, even if you tick the box to disable sharing of device analytics[0][1].
[0]: https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-analytics-tracking-even-whe...