Information Security & US & Life & Love & Fashion & Hacking & Passion

Nintendo's Low-Tech TV Is Long On Charm
You almost have to feel sorry for Microsoft and Sony. After pouring powerful technology and all sorts of extra features into their video-game consoles, the comparatively simple Nintendo Wii and its cutesy family-oriented games proved the bigger hit with consumers. Now Nintendo wants to put pressure on its rivals with a dedicated video service, one that seems riddled with technological and content-related weaknesses but which might still win over consumers with its low-tech charm and demographic reach.

Nintendo's planned video-on-demand service--reportedly called "Wiinoma"--has some obvious disappointments. It is so far only slated for launch in Japan, potentially excluding a large chunk of Wii owners. Even if the service spreads to Europe and the United States later in 2009, don't expect to be watching favorites like Lost or The Wire straight away. Only videos exclusively made for the Wii will be available, with media firms like Fuji Television (other-otc: FJTNF - news - people ) and Nippon Television (other-otc: NPTVF - news - people ) reportedly planning cartoons, entertainment shows and other original programming for the launch.

The Wii console itself has its limitations when it comes to video playback, a sign that Nintendo (nasdaq: NTDOY - news - people ) never really intended to sell it as a mixed-media box. You can't play DVDs on the Wii, and its puny 512-megabyte storage memory is barely enough to store game downloads and save positions--let alone video footage. Trying to sell the Wii as a video-focused console will therefore be tough, no matter how many Japanese cartoons or cookery shows are available for streaming.

Compare this with the Sony (nyse: SNE - news - people ) Playstation 3 and Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people )'s Xbox 360, which have trailed the Wii in worldwide sales since 2007. Both consoles can play DVDs, both offer movie downloads and both have online video stores selling television shows from the likes of Fox and TimeWarner. Hard-drive space varies, but customers can upgrade at their leisure or fork out for a big-memory bundle: the Xbox 360 offers a 120-gigabyte model, while the Playstation 3 can be bought with 160 gigabytes of storage space. Wii users are stuck with their 512 megabytes.

But Nintendo is no fool, and the company might find a different kind of advantage in a stripped-down, exclusive-for-Wii video service. Advertisers are already interested by the Wii's success, given that advertising agency Dentsu is launching the channel with Nintendo, and free-to-watch videos may end up doing more for the Nintendo brand and its products than pay-per-view movies and television shows would.

"Nintendo could have an advertising advantage," said Michael McGuire, an analyst with Gartner Research. "With the interactive nature of the games, you've got Wiis that are in homes and exercise classes, and that's a pretty interesting demographic."

Electronics maker's new TV model can pull movies off the Internet all by itself.

From a pure financial perspective, Chicago would have the most to gain if the International Olympic Committee delays the bidding on American television rights for the 2016 Games until after the site is chosen.

The IOC's top negotiator said Wednesday that delaying the bidding process for the 2016 Olympics until after the location is known makes the most sense in the current financial climate. Normally, the bidding takes place before the site is selected.

Chicago, Madrid, Rio de Janeiro and Tokyo are the finalists. One of the four will be chosen Oct. 2.

"In that sense, it removes some of the uncertainty, which may work to our advantage or not," IOC finance commission chairman Richard Carrion said of the possible delay.

It's a delicate subject, one the Chicago 2016 people didn't want to delve into too deeply.

"Our official public stance would be that that decision is separate from the bid race, and we don't believe it has any impact on us trying to win the bid," said Chicago 2016 spokesman Patrick Sandusky.

U.S. Olympic Committee officials and officials from NBC declined comment.

ESPN International will have worldwide television rights to the IndyCar and Firestone Indy Lights series through the 2010 season under a two-year contract extension with the Indy Racing League.

The agreement announced Wednesday does not include coverage in the United States, where races are carried by ABC and VERSUS, or Brazil, where BAND TV has broadcast rights. The IRL and ESPN International will each have an option to extend the agreement another two years after 2010.

ESPN International owns more than 45 television networks outside the United States and is available in 201 countries and territories.

ESPN and ABC are owned by The Walt Disney Co. (nyse: DIS - news - people )

Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed

(CNET) -- Television as we know is about to change drastically in the U.S. in February when broadcasters switch solely to transmitting digital signals. And even though there are many benefits to this transition, there are also a few downsides.

Here's the lowdown on what you can expect from the new digital TV service, the good, the bad, and the ugly.

First, let's start with the good. On February 17, broadcasters throughout the country will flip a switch turning off their old analog TV transmitters, and they will begin transmitting their TV signals only in digital format. Over 90 percent of TV stations today already broadcast both analog and digital stations, which means that consumers don't have to wait until February to test and tweak their TVs to get digital TV.

For the most part, the switch to digital TV will benefit all Americans, regardless of whether they watch over-the-air TV.

Digital signals use wireless spectrum much more efficiently than analog signals, which is why the government mandated the switch in the first place. Congress set the February 17, 2009, deadline so that the government could free up wasted spectrum so that it could be used to build more robust emergency wireless networks, as well as provide the private sector with more spectrum that could be used to develop new wireless broadband services.

The government has already auctioned off most of the unused spectrum. And after February, service providers who won licenses in those auctions will be able to get to work building their next-generation wireless networks.

For over-the-air TV viewers, the switch to digital also has many benefits, including sharper pictures, better sound quality, and more content. Using analog signals, broadcasters can only transmit one channel of content at a time.

But with digital signals, broadcasters can transmit multiple channels at once. In fact, many broadcasters have already launched three or four separate digital channels, each carrying programming of interest to diverse communities. And because there is more bandwidth available, broadcasters are also transmitting some of these channels in high-definition.

In some cases if consumers have a high-definition TV, they'll even be able to get some HD channels for free. For example, all the major networks--ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC--transmit some shows over the air in HD. This means that many consumers will be able to access HD content without subscribing to a pricey cable package.

"Digital broadcast will vastly improve free TV viewing," said Graham Jones, the director of communications engineering for the science and technology department of the National Association of Broadcasters. "All the networks are broadcasting in HD, and viewers can receive it for nothing. They don't have to pay a cent. And with modern receivers and antennas, reception is very solid."

Better for many, not all

But with the good, also comes some bad. Unfortunately, not everyone in every corner of the U.S. will experience all the great benefits of digital TV. Because analog signals transmit over longer distances than digital signals, some over-the-air viewers living in rural areas may find that they do not get all the same channels they were able to when they received analog TV.

This scenario is mostly true for people who already receive weak analog TV signals. For example, if someone generally gets a snowy or fuzzy picture using an antenna to receive an analog TV signal, there's a good chance that the viewer won't be able to receive the digital signal at all.

"Some people may have been able to put up with a poor analog signal, because the receiver still received the transmission, albeit in a fuzzy form," Jones said. "But if a digital signal is weak, the receiver can't decode it, and the transmission stops, which means people simply get a blank screen."

This is exactly what happened to some viewers in Wilmington, North Carolina, when the Federal Communications Commission and local broadcasters tested turning off their analog signals earlier this year.

Broadcasters have tried to compensate for this issue by boosting transmission power, but Jones said because digital and analog signals are broadcast at different frequencies it may be difficult to replicate broadcasts exactly, which means some people may be left without some channels they could have received with analog transmissions.

The issues won't be limited to rural consumers. Some city dwellers may also have trouble receiving certain channels. Even though people living in a city such as New York or Chicago will likely be able to receive strong digital broadcast signals, they could fall victim to other issues that preclude them from receiving certain channels further up the dial. The reason is simple. Channels broadcast at higher frequencies don't go around buildings or through walls as easily, and this could disrupt transmission.

Consumers may have to do a little research

But consumers shouldn't throw their hands up in defeat too quickly. With a little investigation and a few extra dollars spent on new equipment, even viewers in some challenging geographies could still receive a good quality digital TV experience.

So what's a consumer to do? First, consumers who rely on over-the-air broadcasts need to determine whether they want to keep their old analog TVs or invest in new digital or high-definition TVs. If a consumer keeps his old analog TV, the government is offering $40 coupons to help defray the cost of buying a digital converter box, which attaches to the TV and costs about $60.

These boxes essentially turn an old TV into one that can view digital signals. If he is already getting a good analog signal, he'll likely be able to keep the same antenna for the digital service. But if he was already getting a poor signal, Jones recommends upgrading to a better antenna.

But Jones also emphasizes that to get the best digital TV experience consumers should buy a new digital or high-definition TV. As of March 1, 2007, all television reception devices, which includes TVs, VCRs, and DVRs, sold in the U.S. have been required by law to contain a digital tuner. And with smaller HDTVs selling for as little as $400 or $500, high definition has also become an affordable feature.

But even with a new digital TV, Jones said that consumers will still need an antenna to receive the over-the-air signals. For help in determining which kind of outdoor antenna you might need, check out AntennaWeb.org. This is a Web site set up by NAB and the Consumer Electronics Association that allows consumers to enter their address and provide details about their immediate surroundings, such as how many trees or tall buildings are nearby, to help determine which type of antenna would be best.

Jones also recommends that before consumers buy a new antenna they try their old one first. Several retailers, including Best Buy, are offering workshops around the country to provide information to consumers. There is also information on the Web site DTVanswers.com.

And Jones suggests that consumers call their local broadcast stations directly to figure out in which direction they should point their antenna for the best reception. Local broadcasters will also be able to provide information about whether consumers are even within range to receive the new digital signal.

"There are some 1,700 broadcasters in the U.S.," Jones said. "The local stations will know better than we will how to help viewers in their specific region. So if people have questions, they should call their local broadcasters. And these broadcasters should be available and able to help them."

Several local stations have already set up hotlines for consumers to call. And broadcasters around the country have been "soft" testing the transition. During these tests, broadcasters turn off their analog signals. If consumers are still trying to view the channel using an analog TV, a screen will pop up where the program had been informing viewers of the deadline and how to get ready for the digital switch.

A bill passed in the U.S. Senate last week that would require some broadcasters to offer this information screen to viewers for 30 days after the February 17 deadline. The measure must still pass the House of Representatives before it becomes law.

But even if it does become law, Jones said that not every broadcaster would be able to continue broadcasting the message over its analog channel, because as of that date, new spectrum holders will have access to those airwaves. Instead, he has been encouraging viewers not to wait until the deadline to test their digital TV readiness.

"Broadcasters are already transmitting digital signals today," he said. "So there's no reason for people to wait until February to make their equipment tweaks and start benefiting from digital."

LCD

Against the backdrop of an economy that grows more precarious by the day, the outlook for holiday gift spending is bleak. Even so, consumers will be buying gifts, and consumer electronics will be high on their shopping lists, even if spending will be lower this year.

Amid the diminished expectations, some product categories will hold their own this season, industry and retail analysts say. An early November survey of consumer intentions by the Consumer Electronics Assn. found that U.S. shoppers expect to spend an average of $1,437 on gifts this year, less than the $1,671 they spent in 2007. Still, consumers say they'll allocate a larger percentage of their spending—28% vs. 22% last year—to consumer electronics. The idea is that families will opt for at-home entertainment rather than travel and dining out.

And despite what you may have heard about video entertainment migrating to the Web, the TV set is still the king of the home entertainment universe. Prices are coming down quickly. In September, the average price on a 32-inch LCD TV was $858, a drop of about $100 from the same period in 2007. Now, it's possible to buy a 32-inch LCD set for as little as $399.

No Competition for Blu-ray

One reason, says iSuppli analyst Riddy Patel, is that there is an oversupply of LCD panels, so manufacturers like Sony (SNE), Samsung, and Sharp can pass favorable component pricing on to consumers. "The prices are suddenly very attractive on these sets," Patel says. "The only question is how consumers will react." Her firm recently slashed its 2008 forecast for LCD TVs by 5 million units, to 94 million. It also trimmed its 2009 forecast to 112.5 million units, from 124 million units, meaning the market is growing, though more slowly than before.

Consumers may also be looking for stuff to watch on that new LCD TV. This will be the first holiday season that Blu-ray disc players have had the market to themselves without their onetime competitor HD-DVD. Consumers have so far been slow to embrace the format; even without the competition, sales have been slow. The Consumer Electronics Assn. expects Blu-ray sales of 2 million units in the U.S. this year, vs. 20 million conventional DVD players in the same time frame.

But fast-falling prices may get consumers interested, says iSuppli's Sheri Greenspan. "Blu-ray will gain some attention this year because the prices are coming down so fast, and because retailers are offering package deals that include players with TVs," Greenspan says. Some players, including Samsung, are also upping the ante by adding the ability to play streaming movies from Netflix (NFLX) and music from Pandora to their products.

Ashton Kutcher Connects

The market for digital cameras, a product group that has suffered slowing sales in recent years, is showing life in higher price ranges, and high-end digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) cameras are expected to sell well. "It comes down to the fact that the person buying a DSLR is different from the one who wants a point-and-shoot," says Ed Lee, director of consumer imaging at market research firm InfoTrends. "Despite the economy, people are still buying them, and the prices are coming down." The sweet spot of the DSLR market he says is in the $500 to $800 range.

In what would be a first for college sports on television, the University of Texas is planning to launch its own 24/7 sports network, signaling a further move toward niche programming on cable and satellite.

Officials from the University of Texas have teamed up with the college sports unit of IMG Worldwide, a talent representation and licensing company, to negotiate distribution on Time Warner Cable (TWC), Comcast (CMCSA), and AT&T (T) in Texas and possibly in bordering states, says Pat Battle, a senior vice-president for IMG College. IMG has an agreement with the Austin (Tex.) school, which is part of the Big 12 Conference, to oversee its trademark licensing, marketing, and multimedia rights.

If the channel, which is tentatively being called the Longhorn Sports Network, gets off the ground, it would be the first time a university has created its own sports network seeking broad distribution. "Texas has such an incredible fan base and such great content through all its sports programs," says Battle, "that we feel a network like this will have a real following." A spokesman for DeLoss Dodds, the UT athletics director, said he was unavailable for comment.

College Sports' TV Expansion

While the network will show a range of sports, from baseball to track and field, it currently does not have the rights to show all of Texas' enormously popular football games, which raise doubts about what kind of an audience the network could attract.

Sports are a huge draw in Texas, with college athletics and music as the main attractions in its largest university's hometown. With a storied history in football and the largest university sports budget in the country, at more than $120 million, Texas reportedly operates one of the most profitable university sports programs. The University of Texas football team is currently ranked No. 4 nationwide, having been knocked out of the top spot by a Nov. 1 loss to Texas Tech. Texas plays unranked Baylor at home on Nov. 8.

Over the past decade, college sports has expanded its reach greatly on television, moving from the broadcast networks to cable outlets like ESPN, to regional sports networks like Fox, to college-themed networks like CBS College Sports and ESPNU, to, more recently, networks established by college conferences themselves.

Now Texas is taking the lead to break out on its own to capture revenues exclusively. But is it economically feasible to support a university-only sports network, particularly when it has become much harder to get the necessary distribution on cable to make a profit? "I don't know how far down the tree you can take this thing," says Mike Trager, founder of TV sports consultancy The Trager Group. "The revenue pie for college sports stays essentially the same, but they keep slicing it up. The question for Texas is, 'Can you get the revenue and distribution for that specific of a niche?'"

Texas Football Telecasts

Even as sports offerings have grown on TV, cable and satellite operators have become more resistant to paying for the escalating rights to show sports, their most expensive category of programming. When the Big Ten Conference tried to get distribution deals for its network in 2007, it was met with huge resistance, particularly since it wanted to charge distributors a dollar a month per subscriber (ESPN charges about $3). Cable and satellite operators balked until the Big Ten lowered its price to about 70¢. The Big Ten Network now has distribution to about 35 million homes. Comcast offers it on its expanded basic service in those states with Big Ten schools and on its digital sports tiers elsewhere.

IMG's Battle says Texas would seek distribution only on digital sports tiers, for which subscribers pay an extra fee. The university has not reached any deals with distributors yet, but Alex Dudley, a spokesman for Time Warner Cable, with 1.8 million subscribers in Texas cities like Austin, Dallas, and San Antonio, called the talks "very productive" thus far. A broadband offering of the network or of some programming on the network is under consideration as well, says Battle.

A big sticking point for distributors is knowing which sports and which games the university network will be able to show—mainly the super-popular Longhorn football games. The Big 12 has rights deals for broadcast television with ABC (DIS) and for cable with Fox Sports Networks (NWS), so many of the Texas football games air on those outlets. Fox sometimes sublicenses those rights so Big 12 games also air on other cable outlets, such as ESPN and Versus. Battle says he and university officials are currently in talks with Fox about buying back rights to some Texas games. As it stands now, the university's sports network would be able to air as many as four football games, says Battle. Clearly, they wouldn't be the most competitive matchups since ABC and Fox would want to keep those. The university could offer Fox, or the cable outlets, an equity stake in the network as an incentive to complete the ongoing deal talks. Battle says that hasn't been ruled out as a possibility.

Battle, whose father was the successful University of Tennessee football coach Bill Battle, is not deterred by the challenges. He's hoping the network will launch next fall and perhaps become a model for other large universities. Of course, Battle is not a disinterested party. IMG College represents the rights for 15 Division I universities, including the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, where college sports might just be as much of a religion as it is in Austin.

Teenagers who watch a lot of television featuring flirting, necking, discussion of sex and sex scenes are much more likely than their peers to get pregnant or get a partner pregnant, according to the first study to directly link steamy programming to teen pregnancy.

The study, which tracked more than 700 12-to-17-year-olds for three years, found that those who viewed the most sexual content on TV were about twice as likely to be involved in a pregnancy as those who saw the least.

"Watching this kind of sexual content on television is a powerful factor in increasing the likelihood of a teen pregnancy," said lead researcher Anita Chandra. "We found a strong association." The study is being published today in Pediatrics, the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

There is rising concern about teen pregnancy rates, which after decades of decline may have started inching up again, fueling an intense debate about what factors are to blame. Although TV viewing is unlikely to entirely explain the possible uptick in teen pregnancies, Chandra and others said, the study provides the first direct evidence that it could be playing a significant role.

"Sexual content on television has doubled in the last few years, especially during the period of our research," said Chandra, a researcher at the nonpartisan Rand Corp.

Studies have found a link between watching television shows with sexual content and becoming sexually active earlier, and between sexually explicit music videos and an increased risk of sexually transmitted diseases. And many studies have shown that TV violence seems to make children more aggressive. But the new research is the first to show an association between TV watching and pregnancy among teens.

The study did not examine how different approaches to sex education factor into the effects of TV viewing on sexual behavior and pregnancy rates. Proponents of comprehensive sex education as well as programs that focus on abstinence said the findings illustrate the need to educate children better about the risks of sex and about how to protect themselves, although they disagree about which approach works best.

"We have a highly sexualized culture that glamorizes sex," said Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association. "We really need to encourage schools to make abstinence-centered programs a priority."

But others said there is no evidence that abstinence-centered programs work.

"This finding underscores the importance of evidence-based sex education that helps young people delay sex and use prevention when they become sexually active," said James Wagoner of Advocates for Youth. "The absolutely last thing we should do in response is bury our heads in the sand and promote failed abstinence-only programs."

Chandra and her colleagues surveyed more than 2,000 adolescents ages 12 to 17 three times by telephone from 2001 to 2004 to gather information about a variety of behavioral and demographic factors, including television viewing habits. Based on a detailed analysis of the sexual content of 23 shows in the 2000-2001 TV season, the researchers calculated how often the teens saw characters kissing, touching, having sex, and discussing past or future sexual activity.

Among the 718 youths who reported being sexually active during the study, the likelihood of getting pregnant or getting someone else pregnant increased steadily with the amount of sexual content they watched on TV, the researchers found. About 25 percent of those who watched the most were involved in a pregnancy, compared with about 12 percent of those who watched the least. The researchers took into account other factors such as having only one parent, wanting to have a baby and engaging in other risky behaviors.