For the time being at least, network television programming is still available for free online thanks to sites like Hulu. While that's almost certainly going to change in the coming year or two, TV fans are enjoying their time in the sun for now. What hasn't been so cheery is access to the same content for mobile users, thanks to data plan charges, video optimized for larger screens, and the ongoing no-Flash-on-iPhone embarrassment. If you're willing to pay the price, though, Fox may have just the mobile entertainment solution for you, in the form of its upcoming Bitbop service.

Bitbop costs $10 a month, giving you access to Fox, NBC, and Discovery content, including both shows and films. Right there is a good chunk of Hulu material, and maybe considering the for-pay arrangement, users could get access to even more shows (or better, complete runs of those shows). The on-demand videos will be available over both WiFi and 3G connections, and the line of supported phones is pretty impressive: Bitbop will work on the iPhone, Android OS, and some BlackBerry models.

Of course, there are always catches, like how some movies will cost extra above that $10 fee, and you'd better keep a close watch on your bandwidth if your "unlimited" 3G data plan has a monthly cap with overage charges. On the plus side, Bitbop content will be optimized for the small screens these smartphones use, which should both keep data usage down and provide smoother playback.

Bitbop apps will be available for the aforementioned phone platforms in the next few weeks.

While gadgets come in all shapes and sizes, they tend to follow some basic rules for their form. Widescreen laptops for gaming, ruggedized ones for industry, and even tiny netbooks are all basically the same design, just scaled and tweaked to their intended applications. That's not to say that these relatively basic changes don't excite us - just look at the buzz around the iPad, just a scaled-up iPhone - but it's not often that we see something that just looks new. Qualcomm may be bringing such a product to market: a dual-hinged, three pane touchscreen, folding mobile device.

This innovative Qualcomm design was revealed through a patent application filing. Three panels are attached along their long edges to fold up into a Z-shape when closed into a phone-sized form-factor. The internal screens would shut off, letting you still interact with the outer ones. Fully unfolded, you'd be looking at a unified widescreen display. It may not replace a proper monitor, what with the two vertical seams running down it, but could be an awesome portable presentation tool or impromptu sign.

By folding the device partway, you'd be able to configure it to act like a laptop, using one touchscreen as a virtual keyboard, or as a self-supporting display to act as a clock or notification screen. Qualcomm intends for the device to recognize the configuration you've folded it into and automatically adjust its interface and behavior accordingly.

The logistics of making something like this make it seem like it's still a couple years off, if it ever gets made at all. It would have to be very sturdily constructed and all those screens would cost a pretty penny. We're optimists, though, and this looks cool not to get made.

It certainly seems like Google's made a place for itself in every other corner of our lives, so why not on our TVs as well? The company is working with Dish Network to bring the brains behinds its success as a search engine to help you weed through TV listings as well as internet content displayed on your television.

The Android-based set-top boxes the project uses integrates Dish's satellite programming with content Google pulls from around the web. A search for "football" could return broadcast games as well as YouTube videos of the local high school team. Of course, you don't want to be clumsily typing in your queries with a remote and on-screen keyboard, so the box supports hooking up a proper QWERTY board to make search entry as smooth as possible. This hearkens back to when Dish built receivers with WebTV integration over a decade ago, also supporting wireless keyboards (though without the Google flair).

Right now this project is in very limited testing; if you don't already work for Google, good luck getting your hands on one. Neither Google nor Dish have made any statements about the project, and it very well may never see a commercial product come out of it, but it's provocative to think about how Google could change how you find and watch shows.

If you're getting tired of Avatar after your twelfth viewing, wish you had some new games for your Nintendo Virtual Boy, and just don't feel that the real world "pops" in 3D like the movies do, the 3D fix you've been craving might be just around the corner, as Best Buy is about to give the US its first big taste of in-home 3D screens, with a little help from Panasonic.

Starting this week, as soon as Wednesday, Best Buy is going to set up 3D demo areas in its stores to show off the technology to consumers. Just like how the company created listening rooms to show off the capabilities of surround sound systems, these demo stations will likely introduce this new technology to plenty of people for the first time. The showcase of the displays will be Panasonic's 3D sets, with Best Buy stocked and ready to start selling them to interested customers.

Best Buy will start things off in 300 of its stores in major markets, and plans to expand its promotion of 3D sets to about 1,000 locations by the end of the year.

Though certainly more expensive than normal 2D screens, the Panasonic models Best Buy will be selling aren't priced so exotically as to make them unaffordable - in fact, we should be getting the sets cheaper than they can be found in Japan. A 50-inch set will go for around $2500, with another $500 for goodies like the 3D glasses and Blu-ray player you'll need to really enjoy some 3D content.  Just think of the expense like 250 trips to the movies; after that, you're saving money.

We’ve all had this moment. You want to talk to a friend about some great TV program you just saw. Instead of engaging or heeding your recommendation they simply announce, “I don’t have a TV.”

We all know where that conversation leads. Either they’re considerate and just let it go. But more often they tell you with a wave of their hand, “All television sucks” and/or that will be followed up with the declarative statement, “I read.” It’s impossible for this whole episode to go down without the non-TV owner coming off as incredibly pompous and you being resentful and condescended to.

There are tons of things I don’t have. I never feel compelled to publicly announce to people what I don’t have. Why do people who don’t have a television feel compelled to publicly announce that they don’t have one?

Why can we proudly announce we don’t watch TV, yet nothing else?

Next time someone recommends a good book, go ahead and say, “I don’t read books…Everything written sucks.”

Next time someone recommends an exhibit at a museum, go ahead and say, “I don’t go to museums…All art and history suck.”

Next time someone recommends a new album, go ahead and say, “I don’t own a stereo…All music sucks.”

Why can’t we say that? Just like there’s plenty of bad TV, there’s plenty of bad music and poorly written books and bad art.

The reason is TV’s branding has been poor for decades. We happily call it “the idiot box” and “the boob tube.” While we may deride certain categories of music, books, and art, we haven’t collectively denigrated all the output of a single media.

With the Internet it’s now possible to announce “I don’t have a TV” and not be arrogant

Today, if someone announces, “I don’t have a computer…Everything on the Internet sucks,” you feel sorry for them. Good luck trying to belittle someone with that statement. With that admission you set yourself up for exclusion. “Yeah, we’d like to invite you, but you’re not online.”

The Internet has become such a massive distribution platform of all media that the need for a traditional TV may no longer be necessary. Yes, TV-Internet convergence has been going on for more than a dozen years, but that viewing experience is becoming more personalized. Instead of being a self-important Luddite by announcing, “I don’t have a TV,” you can appear as a forward thinking consumer by announcing, “I don’t need a TV.”

Just as mobile phones can supplant landline phones, where many people don’t need a landline phone, it’s possible the iPad could be a substitution for many media devices. As soon as the Adobe-Apple Flash debate resolves itself, you may hear people saying, “I don’t have a TV, stereo, or books, I have an iPad.”

So you never owned a TV?

I’m sure there are people reading this who for years have not had a television and they don’t believe that they’re being pompous when they tell people they don’t have a TV. I know you don’t believe you were sounding self-righteous, but you were. And I feel I can say that with some level of assurance, never having met you. Because unless you were poor or homeless, it’s been very difficult to say, “I don’t have a TV” and not come off as a pompous ass.

Today with ubiquitous video on the Internet, you can probably get away with it, and often be admired. Still, it’s best not to be confrontational.

Next time someone recommends you watch a certain show, instead of responding, “I don’t have a TV,” just say, “OK,” and then ignore their advice. It’s exactly what I do when people tell me, “You HAVE to read this book.” It’s far more polite than saying, “Reading is stupid.”

Creative Commons photo credit Robert Scoble / CC BY 2.0David Spark helps businesses grow by developing thought leadership through storytelling and covering live events at Spark Media Solutions. He blogs at The Spark Minute and can be heard and seen regularly on ABC Radio, Cranky Geeks with John C. Dvorak, and KQED in San Francisco. See his business profile, contact David, or leave a comment below.

Tweet It! Buzz This Post Delicious Digg This Post Facebook Reddit Stumble This Post