This website uses cookies to help improve your user experience
At first glance, Smart TV and mobile TV testing appear to belong to entirely different worlds. Ask any AI assistant, and you’ll likely receive a list of contrasts — distinct navigation patterns, interaction models, user expectations, and so much more.
But is the difference truly that stark? What if a well-designed automation testing approach can bring these ecosystems much closer than they seem? What if automated Smart TV testing can make even complex Smart TV navigation predictable and manageable, without altering the existing automation logic?
To explore this, we spoke with Oxagile’s test automation expert, Maksim Doroschenko, presenting him with several common assumptions about Smart TV testing and asking for evidence-based confirmation or rebuttal drawn from real project experience. As a bonus, he shared a set of best practices that have consistently proven effective across multiple video streaming projects delivered by Oxagile, a Smart TV app development company.
Are these insights surprising? That’s for you to decide.
Key takeaways:
Smart TV navigation is seen as a tangle of buttons (Back/Home, Left, Right), UI focus elements (Hey, remote control!), and tricky font sizes that are hard to read from the distance. At the same time, the only thing that should be carefully checked on mobile is a touch sensor control with its accurate responsiveness of elements.
Hands-on expert insight:
“When we compare OTT Mobile and OTT TV, the automation architecture is almost the same. For navigation, which differs depending on the device, we create a dedicated module that describes all navigation rules. When switching between screens, the tests simply call the corresponding module and its ‘navigate’ method.
This way, we don’t have to write out every navigation step manually — everything happens automatically “under the hood”.
Each screen is represented by a Page Object or Screen Object class that defines the screen’s elements and possible actions (click, type, scroll, etc.). Our tests are built from these modules, which makes the whole framework modular, reusable, and easy to maintain.”
In the test automation framework crafted by Oxagile, the application screen is described as a matrix of elements arranged vertically and horizontally, defining which elements can receive focus and how navigation between them works.
Thanks to this, the framework can automatically determine the current focus position on the screen by simply reading which element is active at a given moment.
When a test needs to execute a command like “move to this element”, the navigator calculates the path on its own, for example, “three steps right, one step up”, and performs the transition. All of this happens under the hood, so in tests, the ‘navigate’ method is used. It allows moving to the desired element without explicitly describing each step.
This approach is one of the key features of Smart TV automation. It lets you move beyond traditional step-by-step testing and work with navigation as a logical structure.
Hands-on expert insight:
“Actually, we often write tests for both mobile and Smart TV applications of one client. The architecture remains the same: I mean the same rails, the same methods, and the same test logic. The only difference is the navigation module we’ve built into the Smart TV app testing architecture.
Thanks to this, QA engineers don’t have to adjust the tests manually — all navigation logic is handled automatically, while the tool knows how to perform user actions, for instance, pressing a button on the remote.
It’s more than just an Oxagile tool — it’s the result of our deep expertise. We know how to build such a system from scratch in any language — Python, TypeScript, or any other tech stack.
When we design automation, we lay the right architectural foundation from the start, making it easy to adapt the solution to any platform.”
Test automation framework by Oxagile: Example for the grid page with 5 items in a row and Simple row layout
First, it’s because of different TV models that use their own operating systems, SDKs, remotes, performance levels, and network adapters.
There may also be differences in color rendering, scaling, and video player behavior, especially when playing DRM-protected or streaming content.
Hands-on expert insight:
“Let me comment on digital rights management right away. Specific stuff, like playback or DRM-protected streams, requires manual QA verification.
As for the basic things to control, we always double-check whether an issue found on an emulator also appears on a real TV. Our experience has shown that emulators catch almost all the same errors as real devices.
Another great point about emulators lies in their flexibility and scalability. On a powerful server, we can run multiple emulator instances in parallel and easily specify which OS version we need — Android 9, 10, and so on.
When we handle testing for Smart TV apps on real devices, things get much more complicated. We never run tests in a single thread; for example, we can execute 500 tests in four parallel threads in just two hours. Running them in one thread would take about eight hours, which is inefficient.
It’s also technically harder to maintain stable automation. If a problem occurs with the emulator, we can simply restart it, create a new session, and rerun the test. Many tools now support running everything in Docker, which makes the process fast and stable.
As a result, our test runs are significantly more reliable. The industry-standard flakiness rate is about 5%, meaning 5 out of 100 tests may fail due to automation issues rather than real bugs. On real devices, this number can easily jump to 20–30%.
The use of emulators also supports automated Smart TV application testing, allowing repeated performance checks, stress tests, and memory leak detection before deploying to real devices.”
Emulators turn out to be convenient not only for functional testing but also for performance testing. Oxagile’s test automation team collects metrics such as memory usage, CPU load, and other indicators, saves them, and compares results across builds to see whether the application’s performance has improved or worsened.
Hands-on expert insight:
“Even if the absolute values differ slightly from those on real devices, the relative changes still accurately reflect performance dynamics. Moreover, emulators are great for detecting memory leaks. If an issue exists, it will accumulate over time, and this can be clearly seen on performance graphs. Memory leaks are directly linked to overall performance, and in this regard, emulators perform just as well as real devices.”
By combining thorough testing with proven Smart TV UX/UI practices, we create interfaces that keep users immersed in the content. Consistent performance, smooth playback, intuitive navigation, and personalized recommendations are core to every custom Smart TV solution we build.
When we test apps on Smart TV, it seems reasonable to validate long viewing sessions, voice search functionality, and lean-back scenarios, where users interact with the interface from a distance using a remote.
For Mobile TV, the priorities are likely to be different: you should focus on how the app behaves when switching between other apps, how it handles background notifications, and whether it resumes correctly after returning to the screen.
This assumes autonomous testing scenarios, because the usage context is not the same. Smart TV implies more of a “lean-back”, passive viewing experience, while mobile devices involve frequent switching and short, interactive sessions.
Hands-on expert insight:
“In short, test automation covers the common functional base for both Smart TV and Mobile TV. The platform-specific nuances are then verified manually by the QA team.
In more detail, our automation consists of many isolated test cases designed to pinpoint issues precisely. Of course, we can run long sessions like “watching live content for two hours” or perform stress tests on request, but that’s not our focus. The key goal of automation is to take routine, repetitive checks off the QA team’s plate, ensuring that all the fundamental scenarios work reliably and stay under control.
Manual testing focuses on platform-specific, exploratory, and context-dependent scenarios where human observation and adaptability matter most.
As for the acceptance criteria, they are consistent across devices. We add a permission, say, an age restriction, and then go to a rail and verify that the content matches the age limit (visible up to age 12, hidden after). The same test case runs on both Smart TV and Mobile TV — similar rails, similar categories, search working equally well. This approach ensures consistency and reliability across platforms.
We don’t automate some specific mobile checks, like notifications, low battery, or switching between apps. They tend to be unstable, time-consuming, and costly, so we leave those to manual testing. The same goes for network scenarios like “poor internet connection”. Our automation focuses on maintaining a stable functional baseline instead.
Though, occasionally, we create specific stress tests for unique situations, e.g., catching a rare bug that only appears after long playback sessions. One of such cases involved memory leaks: the app would crash after about three hours of continuous viewing. We developed an overnight test that simulated watching and navigation for 7–8 hours, collected memory and CPU metrics, and then compared results across builds. That’s how we confirmed the fix actually worked.”
Oxagile’s test automation team handles regression testing, which frees up manual QA specialists to focus on cross-device checks and more complex scenarios.
As a result, the share of time manual testers can dedicate to new feature testing increases from around 50% to as much as 80%.
How do you test Smart TV apps? The variety of operating systems, remote-based navigation, and large-screen experiences introduce specifics you won’t encounter in Mobile TV environments.
But there’s no need for guesswork or fear. With a well-designed test automation architecture that accounts for key nuances, particularly focus-based navigation, Smart TV testing becomes a structured, predictable, and highly scalable process.
When the approach is right, even complex Smart TV ecosystems are fully testable with clarity and confidence.
Opt for Smart TV app testing services handled by pros who can help validate your application across devices, operating systems, and usage scenarios that reflect real world conditions.
Smart TV app testing is the process of verifying that an application works correctly across different TV platforms, screen sizes, and input methods. It includes checking navigation with a remote control, focus management, playback quality, performance, compatibility with various operating systems (Tizen, webOS, Android TV, Fire TV, etc.), and overall user experience on large screens.
A few practical recommendations on how to test Smart TV apps include:
The biggest challenge is handling focus-based navigation reliably. Unlike mobile apps, which rely on touch input, Smart TV apps use directional focus logic, which should work flawlessly across screens, layouts, and device types.
Yes, automated testing smart TV is entirely feasible with a structured approach. By modeling each screen as a grid of focusable elements and using a dedicated navigation module, tests can interact with remote-based interfaces without manually scripting every step. Core functionality, regression checks, and even long-session playback scenarios can be reliably validated through automation, while platform-specific quirks or edge-case behaviors are handled manually. This combination lets QA teams maintain consistency across devices, scale test coverage, and focus human effort where it matters most.
