It's all pretty bad.
It's now as much part of their brand as all other things are.
But I think the long and mysterious-at-first-glance model numbering is usually a good thing since it encodes a lot of useful information.
Sony’s problem is that they try to sell bad products for the price of expensive ones, and the best way to do that is to have incomprehensible names.
When I was looking in physical stores, at physical devices, I noticed that there were important differences between the [A-Z][8-9]0[A-Z]s, when I would research the model numbers online. 80 vs 90 indicated jumps in overall quality, depending on the other letters in the model name, which usually meant that the product was created specifically for the store (like Best Buy vs Costco vs buying direct), and would have other minor differences from the 'true' version.
A regular person would have probably just looked at the TVs in-store and decided based on whatever looked best, but I happened to have some specific features I wanted, and the weird-ass model names helped.
I really wanted a Panasonic Plasma but it looks like the sole importer may not be getting them anymore or might be getting less. But from what I understand the A90J and the top end Panasonics are the best in that they have a much better heatsink
It runs Android TV, which may or may not be a dealbreaker for you, but I enjoy it enough. I just wanted to be free of a vendor-specific TV os, in order to give myself more flexibility when I try to set up a pi-hole in the future. There's also a hardware switch to disable the TV's microphone.
Also, the sound comes out from the panel itself, and is (to me) great. It calibrates itself using the microphone within the remote, by having you hold it a certain way when performing setup.
Finally, there's an incredibly posh and satisfying 'click' noise when you turn it off. I don't know why, but this makes me like the TV more.
My TV lacks the ability to transmit audio via Bluetooth (no, I can't enable it, I think it actually lacks the module). Nobody could have told me that before I bought it, the marketing material and manuals all claim that it has it. There is precisely NO documentation for my specific model.
I'm starting to think that they're actively counting on people not completely testing their devices after getting them.
First, one could think that larger number means larger performance but this is not always the case. Second, one might think that "Ti" or "super" GPU is better than a regular one in every aspect but this is not the case also.
The same is about Intel. The best naming scheme is where numbers reflect performance or core count or cache size so that they can easily be compared by a consumer.
Overall Nvidia generally has a very good naming system. They are easy to understand if you look at them for more than a minute. Nvidia is 4090? 40 = Generation. 90 = Model. Higher model # is better. They've stuck with the general concept for the better part of 20 years.
Intel's naming is decent. Their cutsey names like Sandy Bridge, meh. No one can never remember those. But the Core numbering system is solid. i3 is lowest. i9 is highest. The processor numbers after that can be a little hard and do require a bit of a decorder matrix to understand. But as long as it's a system, with rules, that they follow, and can be explained fairly easily - I'm ok with it. Heck they have a page that gives you the magic decoder ring: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor...