Nah, they're not related at all. Heck, a good example is myself: I want simple products (that my {grand,}parents could use to, say, view Netflix), yet I don't want artificially castrated ones. (It's common in Spain to refer to these types of artificial limitations as "castrating" a product -- I find that word quite appropriate)

I don't understand why LG puts all the home menu crap with their "marketing" names instead of generic names. The net result is that even I have problems navigating through the "features". Or the "simple sharing" stuff that I never got to work consistently, despite having a master's degree on this, and even having used a network sniffer, something out of reach for 99.9999% of users of this TV set.

Google came in and did something much better (YouTube 'remoting') that a) is actually more universal, compatible with more handsets than just LG's, b) more reliable, despite using just a web browser, and c) has a simpler interface!


But what really annoys me is why I can't plug a RS232 to the service port behind the TV and get a shell prompt. This cannot be explained by user friendliness "requirements" at all. The only reasons I could think of are:
- DRM
- Planned obsolescence (e.g. _literally_ the software feature I want is the only difference between the 2014 and the 2015 models. The HW is _the same_.).
- They're just evil?
- Did I say DRM?

Considering that they also "castrate" Bluetooth support so that it only works with headsets that have the words "LG" on its model name (true story), I bet they're just evil.

I have to say though that the webOS interface, specially with the air mouse, is actually one of the easiest ones I've seen around. The cons are that it has poor standard TV remote usability and .. slowness.