Very often when someone complains about buffering issues or picture quality of a particular iptv service they get an answer such as "Try using Perfect Player", "try playing the video in VLC" or "Buy a Mag, Kodi wasn't designed for iptv"
I understand that a Mag can be more user friendly, but I don't see the reason why it would be better to have less buffering issues or picture quality.
From what I can see a Mag is just a Linux "computer" with locked OS. When it comes to playing the video all what the computer will need to do is open a link, be able to read the content of the m3u8 file and play the videos contained in each channel using the needed decoders.
I would like to know the reaons why Kodi would be worst at doing this than a Mag
PS: saying that a Mag was designed for this but Kodi not isn't a valid reason
Maybe (just my thoughts based on the various configs I've used), it's less about Kodi itself and more about what people are running Kodi on. MAG devices have OS, firmware, drivers and even the app layer built, designed and (likely) tuned for the hardware. Now take Kodi. Majority of people I know, run this on android boxes where the firmware and OS is at best stable but normally not really tuned for the hardware. (You can normally see this with the inconsistent WiFi throughput and, in some cases, Ethernet issues) ... When you take something like AFTV or Nvidia Shield and run the same Kodi setup as one of the above boxes, I see a noticeable difference. Everything just runs faster, smoother and consistently... because their OS and firmwares are tuned for the HW. So, again, I wouldn't say it's Kodi itself. BTW I run and have run many IPTV services on my FireTV and Nvidia Shield. If someone on MAG (many of my family and friends) is not having issues, I'm not either. But my experiences on T8s, M8s and other android boxes has been hit and miss in getting the same streaming to work for sports streams and IPTV.
TL;DR. It's less about Kodi and more to do with the hardware you are running Kodi on