Which means we’re in for an interesting game of chicken between Time Warner’s movie studio and the two rental services. And the result will be meaningful for Netflix, too.

Here’s where things stand: Warner Bros wants to double the “window” that keeps new DVDs away from rental services from 28 days to 56 days, a strategy that’s supposed to encourage would-be renters to buy DVDs instead. Netflix intends on going along with the plan and will be able to buy discs directly from the studio at wholesale rates.

Warner plans on announcing the new terms next week at the Consumer Electronics Show. But though I reported yesterday that Dish Network’s Blockbuster and Coinstar’s Redbox had signed on, the two companies — directly and indirectly —  say that’s not the case. Earlier today a Coinstar rep told me the company won’t agree to a longer window, and a person familiar with Blockbuster’s thinking now says the same thing.

If neither side backs down, then Blockbuster and Redbox would have a marketing advantage over Netflix, since the companies could boast about getting new movies before their rival.

But that assumes they can get their hands on the movies. That will be costly, and perhaps quite difficult.

In the past, Redbox has bought movies directly from retailers (Netflix also used to do the same thing in the service’s early days. But chains like Wal-Mart and Target have instituted buying caps on their discs  that are supposed to thwart that strategy. (Thanks, Janko Roettgers.)

Grab your popcorn!

For 2012, they are focusing on making TVs “smarter” by enabling them to connect to the Internet for apps and video services on the Web.

But that doesn’t mean 3-D is going away. It’s just riding shotgun with smart TVs.

Smart TV is not a new concept, of course. Up until now, it has been defined as Internet-connected television achieved through a separate box or device that connects to the TV and streams Internet content, or via a computer-like processor built directly into the TV.

On the showroom floor in Las Vegas next week, electronics makers including Samsung Electronics, Sony and LG Electronics are expected to show off more television sets that bring Internet connectivity to entertainment centers for the home. Yesterday, Google announced that LG will join the list of companies supporting Google TV; Samsung, Sony, and Vizio Inc. have also adopted Google’s Internet TV technology.

With Apple rumored to have a possible Internet-connected HDTV in the pipeline, TV makers are making all kinds of pushes to bring to market devices that offer consumers a full range of options. For many consumers, the answer for now will still be external devices that offer easy, upgradable solutions, like the Microsoft Xbox, Apple TV, Google TV and even Roku’s latest gadget.

Analysts believe that Internet-enabled TVs will begin to take a larger share of the market by default, eventually becoming a check-off item for consumers, rather than a special feature. Some 60 percent of new televisions being sold in 2012 are expected to have Internet connectivity. According to NPD’s DisplaySearch, connected-TV shipments are expected to reach 138 million globally by 2015, accounting for 47 percent of all flat-panel TVs.

So where does 3-D fit into all this?

TV makers will still be touting 3-D at CES 2012, as many smart TVs will also include 3-D capabilities. Samsung Electronics, for instance, says that more than half of its 2012 TV models will support 3-D. “Our commitment to 3-D is only deepening,” says Ethan Raisel, director of communications at Samsung.

Tim Alessi, Director of New Product Development at LG, estimates that around 20 percent of all LG TV units will support 3-D, and notes that 3-D is featured in 50 percent of the company’s lineup for this year.

But despite the fact that 3-D TV sales in 2011 showed some encouraging gains — with an estimated 21.5 million 3-D units reported to have shipped last year and sales showing significant gains from quarter to quarter — the forced exuberance over three-dimensional screens has been tempered a bit.

That’s likely because it doesn’t matter how well 3-D TV units are selling — for the consumer, anyway. “It’s not really the penetration that matters, it’s the use,” says Forrester Research analyst James McQuivey. “You’d be hard pressed to find a 3-D TV owner that actually uses it in 3-D mode even once a week. That’s not a formula for building consumer momentum.”

For TV, 3-D presents a three-headed monster: To start, there are the technical and psychological obstacles of those pesky 3-D glasses — and while autostereoscopic (glasses-free) 3-D technology is being worked on in many R&D labs, industry experts all agree that quality 3-D without glasses is at least a few years away.

Secondly, 3-D presents a chicken-and-egg dilemma that doesn’t exist with smart-TV features — the question of where the viewable content will come from. Many content creators have been holding off on making 3-D programs. The Discovery Channel and ESPN made headlines two years ago when they announced 3-D channels; but in terms of sports, 3-D has been relegated to key events, due to high production costs.

An increasing number of 3-D movies are available on DVD, but moviemakers that hopped aboard the 3-D train early — think Pixar Animation Studios and DreamWorks Animation — were likely doing so to plant a flag in the ground for when 3-D finally does hit critical mass in the living room, says Scott Steinberg, head of strategic consulting firm TechSavvy.

Sony Chairman and CEO Howard Stringer even said recently, regarding the company’s 3-D TV push, that he hadn’t realized all of the challenges in getting 3-D content in place.

And the third issue affecting the uptake of 3-D has been the cost of the sets. On average, the cost of 47-inch to 50-inch 3-D TV sets is $400 more than similar HDTVs, according to a 2011 report from Retrevo. And while the entire consumer electronics industry has been hurt by a weak U.S. economy, TV sales have been hit particularly hard.

Steinberg says that for the average American household, television purchasing is about being practical right now. “It’s much more important to have the maximum-value TV with Internet capabilities and apps, than to invest in a still-unproven technology like 3-D.”

A December 2011 report from Parks & Associates on consumer purchasing intent also indicates that smart TVs are what’s grabbing the interest of consumers right now.

Even that report points out that smart TVs won’t deliver the killer blow to 3-D. As smart TVs are punched up with even more features — from apps to motion remotes to voice-command capabilities — more middle-class households looking to purchase smart TVs may buy in to 3-D, whether they’re actively looking for it or not.

Whether consumers actually want to sit in their living rooms and wear 3-D glasses to watch TV remains to be seen. For now, TV makers will still insist that they do.

MORE CES NEWS:

• Complete coverage
• HP’s Former CTO: Ultrabooks Are Nothing New, webOS Still Has Life Yet
• Walt Shows Off CES Gadgets for Fox Business News (Video)
• What Kind of Web Video Plans Does Sony Have? (Video)
• Fujitsu Seeking Way Into Crowded U.S. Smartphone Market
• Why Rhapsody Is (Probably) Bigger Than Spotify — In the U.S.
• Microsoft Beefing Up CeBit Presence Even as It Pulls Back on CES
• Inside the CES Lost & Found
• FCC Chairman Has New Tablet, but Same Script: More Spectrum!
• Verizon Wireless: We Want to Connect Five Devices for Every Subscriber
• Ultrabooks From HP and Lenovo That Are (Kinda, Sorta) Different
• Walt and Katie Take a Tour of CES (Video)
• Schmidt-Storm Alert: The Google Chairman Didn’t Like Your Question
• T-Mobile Expands Bobsled Messaging Service
• Intel Shows Just How It Plans to Get Into Phones (Video)
• Motorola CEO: We’re Going to Release Fewer Phones This Year
• Kinect Helps Keep Aging Xbox at the Top of Its Game
• More From T-Mobile CEO: On Pricing, LTE and That Ever-Elusive iPhone
• Exclusive: New Boss Acknowledges Windows Phone Still Has “Awareness Problem”
• And You Thought Jawbone UP Was Going to Miss the CES Party!
• Interview: T-Mobile CEO Says No Second AT&T Deal Out There
• Grover Is at CES and I Am Missing It
• BlueStacks Bringing Android Apps to Windows 8
• Why the Future of TV Won’t Be Here Soon
• Nvidia’s Tegra 3 Tries to Save Battery in All Sorts of Different Ways
• Dynamic Dual Coverage: Ballmer’s Last Act in Vegas and the BCS Championship in 3-D
• Microsoft Phoning In Its Last CES Keynote
• Myspace — Yes, Myspace — Says It’s Going to Sell You Web TV
• Samsung Unveils “Super” 55-Inch OLED TV
• Nokia Unveils That LTE Windows Phone It’s Been Dying to Share
• Steve Ballmer Gives Ralph De La Vega a Very … Vigorous Greeting (Video)
• Interview: AT&T’s De La Vega on LTE, Tablets and Life After T-Mobile
• AT&T’s De La Vega: Shared Data Plans Still in the Works
• LG: 55-Inch Glasses-Free 3-D Screen Is on the Way
• LG Pushes 4G Smartphone Through Verizon: The LG Spectrum
• Live: AT&T’s Vegas Act Stars LTE and, Making Her Return to the Stage, Nokia
• CES Notebook: The Constant Search for Power and Vegas’ Worst-kept Secret
• Belkin Bringing Mobile TV to Lots of Cellphones, Will Anyone Tune In?
• Acer Introduces “World’s Thinnest” Ultrabook and a “Me-Too” Cloud Service
• There Better Be Some Cool Stuff at CES, Because CE Holiday Sales Data Bytes!
• CES 2012: Snooki and Bieber Are In, Gaga Is Out!
• Coming to a Smartphone Near You: Gorilla Glass 2
• RIM Hopes Next PlayBook OS Will Impress at CES
• Ultrabooks, the Ultra-Fancy New Name for Laptops
• At CES, Expect More Gadgets Telling You to Get Off the Couch
• Intel to Detail Its Phone Plans at CES Next Month
• Microsoft Pulling Out of CES After Upcoming Show
• Intel to Detail Its Phone Plans at CES Next Month
• Dell Will Drop the Flashy Vegas Act for CES This Year
• Ultrabook Conga Line Preps for CES 2012

A new deal between Time Warner’s movie studio and Netflix, Redbox and Blockbuster will double the “window” for new releases. That means the services will now have to wait 56 days after the discs first go on sale to offer them to their customers, instead of 28 days. [UPDATE: Redbox parent Coinstar now says they haven't agreed to a new deal; see below]

The move is part of Hollywood’s ongoing campaign to bolster flagging DVD sales, and sources tell me the new deal is supposed to be announced at next week’s Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. Warner Brothers executives have already talked publicly about extending the current window.

This is the second time that Warner has been able to get the rental services to wait before distributing its movies.

In 2010, it struck deals with Netflix, and later Coinstar’s Redbox, to wait 28 days before renting its new discs. Coinstar and Netflix later landed similar pacts with most of the other big studios. (Coinstar did up end up in legal battles with Universal Studios and 20th Century Fox, which like this Web site is owned by News Corp.)

Two years ago, Netflix was able to argue that by delaying access to DVDs, it was able to get its hands on more streaming content, and lower prices for the discs it did buy. This time around, though, Warner won’t be granting any additional digital rights to the studios. It will simply be offering them the ability to buy discs in bulk, at a significant discount to retail pricing, like they already do.

Earlier today, news broke that HBO, another Time Warner unit, would stop selling its DVDs to Netflix altogether, but sources tell me the two moves aren’t directly related. Next week’s planned announcement is supposed to be tied to Warner Brothers’ continuing push for Ultraviolet, an industry consortium that’s supposed to allow home video buyers to watch their purchases on multiple machines, in multiple formats.

Reps for Time Warner, Coinstar, Netflix and Blockbuster parent company Dish Network declined to comment.

UPDATE: Coinstar is now commenting, via email. “The current agreement Coinstar has with Warner Bros. is to receive movie titles 28 days after their release. No revised agreements are in place.” The company’s current deal with Warner Bros. expires at the end of January; PR chief Marci Maule referred me to comments CEO Paul Davis made last fall about pursuing “workarounds” if studios try to extend their windows.

Today’s underscore opportunity: A press release announcing that Netflix customers streamed “more than 2 billion hours” of video during the last three months of 2011. CEO Reed Hastings telegraphed this one in December, when he told an investor conference that the company was set to stream “well over” a billion hours for the quarter.

But beyond a boilerplate reference to “more than 20 million streaming members,” Netflix isn’t saying how many customers were watching that video. And it’s not providing any other meaningful metrics until it announces Q4 earnings in about a month. So no need to spend any more time on this one.

Streaming is the future. We’re focused on it. DVD will do whatever it’s going to do. We’re not — we’re going to try to not hurt it, but we’re not putting a lot of time and energy into doing anything particular around it and then we’re focused on, how do we take advantage of this incredible global streaming opportunity.

That was Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, at the UBS media conference earlier this month, reiterating the point that Netflix has been making over and over again for some time: They want out of the DVD business, even though it is generating more than $1 billion a year for them.

Hastings and his team are convinced that even though consumers say that discs are important to them, their usage data shows that few people … use them. “Old fogey discs,” Hastings calls them.

Netflix tried very hard to accelerate the decline of DVDs with the Qwikster fiasco. Since then, Netflix has been careful to tell its subscribers who are still paying for DVDs that it is happy to have them around.

New subscribers are a different story, though. Netflix exclusively pushes its $8-a-month unlimited-streaming option, on its site and in its promotional materials. You have to work very hard to discover that the company still rents DVDs, and that’s by design.

Same deal for former subscribers that Netflix is trying to woo back: Even if you used to get both DVDs and streaming videos from Netflix, the company will only tell you about its streaming plan in its “come back!” emails. (See the screenshot of an email my colleague Tricia Duryee, who quit her hybrid plan this fall, got recently, at the bottom of this post.)

But the message is most clear for people who want to give someone a Netflix subscription as a present: The company no longer allows you to gift a subscription that includes a DVD plan, period.

Go ahead and see for yourself — there’s no way to give Reed Hastings and company an extra $8 a month for a service they’re still providing to some 11 million subscribers.

The one tiny workaround that the company offers (if you look very, very hard — or do what I did, and call up Netflix PR and ask) is the ability to let current subscribers extend their current deal. So, for instance, if you’re currently getting the equivalent of a $16-a-month hybrid disc-and-streaming option, and someone gives you a year-long $8-a-month streaming gift, you can convert that into a six-month hybrid plan.

But, boy, that’s complicated. Easier to just give someone a year of streaming, and then send them a check so they can add the DVD portion on their own. Which is what we just did this morning, here at the AllThingsD Brooklyn outpost.

So to repeat: If you work very, very hard, Netflix will let you give it money, and will let you rent DVDs in return. But it would really prefer that you didn’t.

That’s in spite of Zynga, the rising star of social gaming, garnering much of the media’s attention last week, when it raised $1 billion in its initial public offering.

In November, Nintendo’s portable handheld, the 3DS, had its biggest single month of sales, representing an increase of more than 215 percent over the previous month; it has now sold nearly 2.5 million units since launch.

The Wii had its biggest Black Friday ever, with more than 520,000 units sold — six years into the console’s life.

The Japanese company also set a software record. Super Mario 3D Land, which was released Nov. 11, is now the fastest-selling portable Super Mario title in U.S. history, and Mario Kart 7 was the fastest-selling Mario Kart game.

In an interview with AllThingsD at the company’s U.S. headquarters in Redmond, Wash., Nintendo’s North America President Reggie Fils-Aime explained what’s driving strong holiday U.S. sales this year, and what’s on the horizon for the maker of games and hardware.

He also left the door wide open for Nintendo to experiment with new business models, including free-to-play or subscription, although he questioned the long-term prospects of social gaming companies, like Zynga.

Here’s an abbreviated version of our chat:

AllThingsD: It seems videogame sales this holiday kicked off with a bang.

Reggie Fils-Aime: We had a strong Black Friday for both our Wii and 3DS business.

The time frame from mid-November until the end of the year is critically important to us, and is driven by a number of software and hardware initiatives.

For the 3DS, we launched Super Mario 3D Land in November. It had the fastest sell-through for a handheld Super Mario game. That gave us a lot of momentum going into Black Friday, and right after Black Friday, we launched Mario Kart 7, which ended up being the fastest-selling Mario Kart, as well.

Together, that propelled our 3DS business. We’ve sold through more 3DS’s in eight months time than the original DS sold in the first 12 months. Our handheld business has a lot of momentum right now.

But it took awhile to get there?

What’s interesting is that we had a very good launch. The first week sales [of the 3DS] were fantastic. The initial rush of sales was really strong. But what happened after that in the spring and early summer time frame is — that’s when sales slowed down a little bit.

It was driven by not having great first-party software, and we were late in bringing some of the online functionality to the 3DS, and that’s when sales began to fall.

That’s when we took drastic action to reduce the price, right after the launch of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D. Our bet was to regain momentum and make the holidays strong. We are having a strong holiday.

A lot of retailers were concerned that we would see a Black Friday rush and then things would trail off after that. Is that what you are seeing?

We haven’t seen that. We have seen things accelerate as we’ve gotten closer to Christmas Day itself. We are anticipating this week, across all of our businesses, will be the strongest sell-through week of the year.

What about the Wii?

The Wii had a strong Black Friday, too, driven by strong retailer promotions. This was our sixth Black Friday, and it was the best Black Friday week we’ve seen to date, so we’ve had very positive results.

It’s driven by software, and in this case, a new Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword. It’s a game that’s been recognized by the gaming press to be one of the best games of the year.

The momentum continues for our Wii business, and sales are right on objective.

How does it continue to break records six years in? That’s baffling.

It’s because, even today, the Wii provides a family experience that you can’t get anywhere else. I love the stories I hear of grandparents playing with parents and with the grandkids.

Those are experiences that you can’t get elsewhere. That’s why we continue to break records. Plus, this holiday is the first holiday that it’s available for $149 or below. It’s reaching a whole new demographic that’s wanted to buy in, but couldn’t do it before.

And for consumers, there’s over 1,000 games that have been published, so the breadth of the gaming experience is extremely wide. The Wii continues to be the fastest-selling home console ever in the history of the gaming industry in the U.S.

Does that change as we get closer to the next-generation console, the Wii U?

The market is going to continue to differentiate based on the types of experiences that consumers want. As an example, if I’m the head of a household of a family of four, and my disposable income is $50,000 to $60,000, I’m going to continue to look at the Wii because of the software, and it’s a great entertainment device. For consumers who want to have the latest gadgets and have a higher disposable income, that’s for the Wii U.

We haven’t announced pricing or availability or any other details, but given the current pricing of the Wii, it’s not going to be there.

We’ve been very clear, the market is going to decide how long these products will coexist side by side. Our goal is to launch the Wii U and drive it into the marketplace, but it will speak to a different consumer than the one that is buying the Wii today during the holidays.

What about the other consoles? Both Sony’s PlayStation and Microsoft’s Xbox are about the same age.

All of the competitors haven’t talked about what’s next for them, and given the investments they’ve made in their technologies, for them to move to new systems — at least on the same timing we want to move at — would probably be pretty challenging. But in terms of what they are going to do, when they are going to do it, you’ll have to talk to them.

What do you think of Microsoft’s move to make the Xbox the entertainment hub of the living room?

In the end, the consumer decides what equipment to have in the living room. The interesting thing we’ve found — because of the family entertainment we provide, and the inclusion of Netflix — the vast majority of Wiis are set up on the main TV in the living room.

Are you considering adding more content like live TV or movies?

If the consumer wants live TV, they can get it through the options they have today. We always ask the question, ‘What can we do that’s new and provocative?’ And we will continue to think of new and provocative experiences for the user.

I’ve spent the past week covering Zynga’s IPO. What’s your perspective on social gaming?

What’s the share price? It will be interesting when it breaks below $9 … I have a couple of thoughts on social gaming.

Consumers want to be entertained in a variety of ways, like watching TV or reading a book. The thing about entertainment — as consumers have a range of experiences — their desires for what’s new continues to be pushed out. So delivering the same experience all the time … consumers will move on.

So when I look at gaming experiences on social networks, there’s a variety of entertainment value. Some are strong, some are not. But in the end, how will they evolve? Doing the same thing over and over again is no longer fine.

Is that really fair when you have Mario Kart 7 coming out?

We continue to evolve the experience by providing a level of customization that’s new, or different ways to race with a sail and a propeller that allows you to drift under water. What we’ve done with Mario Kart 7, for some of the tracks, you can actually win when you go off the track, which never existed before. We’ve continued to make it more fun and add more enjoyment for the consumer.

You don’t see that innovation happening in social gaming?

The companies that will win in the social gaming space need to show an ability to provide the new and different experiences, and a way to monetize it. In the end, these are businesses that need to make money.

Is that your comment on the free-to-play model? Will you experiment with free-to-play?

I have two comments on that.

First, we make games for Nintendo devices, and that is a competitive advantage for us. You can only play Mario on a Nintendo device, so from that standpoint, I wouldn’t expect to see our franchises on other platforms, and I would argue Facebook is a platform.

My second point, on whether we will experiment with other forms of monetization?

Certainly.

How that comes about, or which ones we do first, that’s all experimentation that’s going on right now in our various studios.

Well, you better decide fast. For many sites, today is the final day that orders can be placed to get guaranteed delivery by Christmas.

If you are having a hard time coming up with ideas, there are plenty of Facebook applications that will offer recommendations based on a gift recipient’s interests.

Late last month, Wal-Mart launched an application called Shopycat, which does just that.

To be helpful, I got a list of Shopycat’s 20 most-recommended gifts. At the very top of the list was an unexpected item called a “personalized keepsake box” for men. The box, which costs $24.76, is designed to hold a man’s watch, jewelry, money clip and/or other items.

It’s not clear what a person’s interests would have been for this to surface at the top of so many lists (maybe the popularity of the holiday-themed Justin Timberlake and Andy Samberg music video “Dick in a Box” had something to do with it?) After all, many of the other items on the list are clearly based on someone’s favorite TV shows, movies or videogames. For instance, other fun items that made the list were action figures for “The Big Lebowski,” an Angry Birds beanie and “Star Wars” bathrobes.

As for the man box, it is sold out, so clearly some people agreed with Wal-Mart that it made for a good gift.

Not all of the items are recommendations for items sold on the Wal-Mart site. It also refers shoppers to other sites, such as ThinkGeek.com, Barnes & Noble, CBSstore.com and RedEnvelope.

Wal-Mart did not say how many people have used the app since it went live last month, but given that Wal-Mart has 11 million Facebook fans, it could represent big numbers.

Here is the entire list of most-recommended gifts for 2011:

1. Personalized Keepsake Box
2. “Star Wars” Jedi & Sith Bathrobes
3. Personalized “Home is Where your Story Begins” Canvas
4. “Twilight: Director’s Notebook: The Story of How We Made the Movie”
5. 3-Pointer Basketball Tin
6. “House” Cane Ornament
7. “Harry Potter” Clue
8. Men’s Comfy Feet Miami Dolphins
9. “How I Met Your Mother” MacLaren’s Irish Pub Shot Glass
10. OtterBox iPhone 4 Defender Case
11. Angry Birds Red Bird Peruvian Beanie
12. Picnic Backpack
13. “The Big Lebowski”: Urban Achiever 8-Inch Figures
14. The Official Chuck Norris Fact Book
15. Tennis Star Gift Tin
16. Dallas Cowboys Floor Mats
17. “1001 Video Games You Must Play Before You Die”
18. “The Wire”: Bubbles Depot Reusable Travel Mug
19. “The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn” Wall Calendar
20. “Game of Thrones” Sword Letter Opener

Tomorrow, Hewlett-Packard is launching the newest version of its HP Envy 17 with 3-D capabilities, alongside the new HP Envy 15 and Envy 17 notebook PCs, available through HP Direct.

For gamers, a 3-D PC offers different kinds of gaming options, and on a larger screen than a handheld device has. But do consumers — hardcore gamers aside — really want a 3-D PC? Let’s take a look at some of the technical specifics and other factors to consider when it comes to computers with 3-D options:

Hardware and glasses:
As the technology gets more advanced, more 3-D laptops are expected to come to market with autostereoscopic (glasses-free) screens. Toshiba, for example, recently introduced the Qosmio F750 (in Europe) and Qosmio F755 (North America); both laptops run Windows 7 and feature a 15.6-inch Toshiba TruBrite 1080p autostereoscopic 3-D display.

But most 3-D laptops — such as the Sony VAIO F 3D, the Origin EON15 3D, the Dell Alienware M17x R3 and the Dell XPS 17 with optional 3-D screen — currently have stereoscopic screens, which means users have to wear glasses to experience the 3-D effect.

Nvidia’s 3D Vision kit is commonly bundled with these laptops and includes a pair of the necessary glasses, as well as a 3-D vision USB controller/emitter.

The kinds of glasses consumers are supposed to wear vary, as well: There’s the “active” kind versus the “passive” kind. Nvidia’s 3-D glasses, for example, are active-shutter lenses (read: battery-operated) that create the 3-D image by rapidly shuttering the left eye and then the right eye. Passive — a.k.a. polarized — 3-D glasses are cheaper, look a lot like sunglasses, and work by allowing different levels of light into each eye. Note that these are different from the anaglyph cardboard glasses you might have worn at the movies as a kid.

So, if the 3-D viewing doesn’t give you a headache, the lack of standardization in this industry just might.

Content: It’s the chicken-or-the-egg problem: Hardware makers can’t sell 3-D products well without enough 3-D content for people to watch and play; content creators are hesitant to invest in making 3-D material when the format hasn’t yet been adopted on a mass scale.

But games may indeed be the shining star when it comes to 3-D on PCs. Game developers have been creating games with inherent 3-D capabilities for many years now; consumers just didn’t have the display options they now have to view the games. And 3-D PCs often include super-fast graphics cards that are optimal for game viewing.

In terms of content volume, Nvidia says its 3D Vision Kit includes software that converts “hundreds” of standard 2-D games to 3-D, including popular titles like Call of Duty: Black Ops, Batman: Arkham Asylum and Battlefield 3.

Price points: Despite the fact that slowing demand for PCs has been pushing netbook and notebook prices down for consumers, 3-D laptop pricing still ranges on the high side. Dell’s Alienware M17x R3 and XPS 17 (with 3-D screen), Toshiba’s Qosmio F755 and the Sony VAIO F 3D all currently retail for around $1,500.

The bottom line: laptops with 3-D capabilities tend to be more expensive at a base price. Add in the cost of active-shutter glasses when they’re not bundled in — anywhere from $40 to $150 — and consumers are paying even more.

Where does the new HP Envy 17 3D fit in?: The new HP Envy 17 3D does have some nice features, such as a 17.3-inch 3-D, LED Radiance display with full 1080p HD viewing, backlit keys, an upgraded touchpad and a Blu-ray and 12.7mm DVD-RW slot. It runs Windows 7, has an Intel Core i5-2340M processor, and its list price is $1,599.99, which includes one pair of 3-D glasses (it does not work with the Nvidia 3D Vision kit). Hopefully, battery life will show improvement from the last Envy 17 3D, which some reviewers complained was short-lived.

Readers, what do you think: Would you buy a 3-D laptop?

That’s good for Sony, the people who paid the bill for “Dragon Tattoo,” right? Nope. Terrible, says Sony.

The studio is livid that the New Yorker is running Denby’s review today, more than a week ahead of a Dec. 13 embargo. Why does the studio care? If you want a good explanation of modern-day movie marketing and the push-pull between filmmakers and film reviewers, check out this lucid explainer from NPR’s Linda Holmes.

But for everyone else, this won’t matter at all. New Yorker readers (and now, drive-by visitors as well, since the review has been placed in front of  the magazine’s online paywall) will see the review, and a larger group of people will have a vague idea that the New Yorker likes it. That’s about it.

And that’s the moral for folks like myself in the technology-news-industrial complex, who spend way too much time thinking about, fighting with and cursing embargoes. This stuff can matter a lot (sometimes) to us, but that’s really only because we decide to agree that it matters. Readers don’t care at all.

I’d spend more time explaining this, except that if you care about this at all, you’ve already read many boring essays about it — perhaps even today! And I can’t tell you that I’m swearing off embargoes, because I can’t — I worked with three of them last week, have probably at least one more embargoed story coming this week and, I’m sure, many more down the road.

But this is a nice reminder that every time I do deal with one of these, it almost always means I’m not spending time on something geniunely interesting. Like news no one else is writing about, or a fresh take on something everyone else has already written about. Or even seeing a good movie.

And if you didn’t understand that one, he offered another metaphor: A “200-pound chimp.”

In the following months, Bewkes cut back on his rhetoric, which may or may not have had anything to do with a lucrative deal to sell reruns of “Gossip Girl” to Netflix. But now that deal has been inked, Netflix stock has been crushed and lots of smart people think the video service may be on a permanent spiral.

So here’s Bewkes again, damning his new partners with very faint praise, this time in the Financial Times instead of the New York Times: Netflix and similar services (read: Hulu and Amazon, for now) can’t get the best stuff anymore, he says, and are stuck showing “archival content that nobody would want in Blockbuster.”

Not that there’s anything wrong with that! Bewkes adds. “It can do certain things and not other things. It can fly, it’s not a submarine. Don’t turn a hamburger into a cow.”

And that is how a pro mixes metaphors and backhanded compliments.

Again, remember that the real purpose of this stuff isn’t to hurt Netflix CEO Reed Hastings’s feelings — Hastings can probably take it — but to make Time Warner shareholders feel better about the company’s cable holdings. Because Time Warner’s cable channels — like TBS and TNT, and its HBO premium channel — are absolutely competing with Netflix for viewer time and dollars, no matter how much either company tries to insist otherwise.

Does this sort of semi-smack-talk entertain you? (It’s okay to admit it. Me, too.) Then you’ll want to check back on Tuesday: Both Bewkes and Hastings are scheduled to present that day at the annual UBS Media/Telecom conference. I’ll be there to record the slings and arrows, and I’ll report back.

Sony tried doing this with “Bad Teacher” last month, and the results sound encouraging for the studio. It says its “windowing” experiment boosted digital unit sales by 60 percent, and overall digital revenue by 24 percent.

That is: Most people prefer to rent a movie than buy it outright. But when offered the chance to pay for a download or wait a couple weeks to rent the movie, some folks paid up.

Digital sales of “Bad Teacher” make up a small percentage of the movie’s overall digital revenue (Sony won’t release actual sales numbers), but there’s a lot more profit in each transaction for the studio. Rentals via iTunes run from $3.99 to $4.99 for the Cameron Diaz vehicle, but sales run from $14.99 to $19.99 a pop.

More good news for Sony: It says demand for digital rentals didn’t seem to drop once they became available two weeks after digital sales started. And physical sales — still the most important source of income for the studio — don’t seem to have suffered, either.

That last point is crucial for Sony’s relationships with the retailers it counts on to move old-fashioned discs while stepping into digital at the same time. Retailers like Wal-Mart and Best Buy are selling Sony’s movies via digital outlets, like Wal-Mart’s Vudu, but they won’t do it at the expense of their brick-and-mortar business (yet.)

“The good news that encourages us is that the physical retailers, those are the guys that are playing well and getting good results out of this,” says John Calkins, who heads up digital for Sony’s home video unit. Calkins figures that the promotion for the early digital sales ended up working as marketing for all of the movie’s sales, and thinks that will work with other films, too.

Calkins just tried the experiment again, with “30 Minutes Or Less,” and says that comedy saw similar results. Calkins says he’ll try it one more time in 2011, with a movie he won’t disclose.

That’s when the streaming video company authorized a $300 million stock buyback plan. Netflix has since spent $259 million of that, all of it on shares priced well above the company’s current $75 level. Ouch.

In the first nine months of this year, Netflix spent $200 million buying back its own shares, at an average price of $222. Almost $40 million of those buys came in August and September, when Netflix shares were headed down on a very steep plunge from $300 this summer. The average price for those purchases was $217 a share.

The company’s last quarterly filing spells it out, if you like rubbing salt in wounds. Here’s the receipt for this year’s first nine months of stock buybacks (click image to enlarge):

And here’s the company’s summer spending spree:

It’s easy to ask: “What were Reed Hastings and company thinking?” And it’s easy to answer: “The same thing they’ve been thinking for years.”

Netflix has consistently been a buyer of its own shares, dating back at least to 2007. The details, via last year’s 10-K:
2007: Netflix bought $100 million worth of shares at an average price of $21.
2008: $100 million at a $26 average, followed by another $100 million at an average of $29.
2009: $175 million at $42, followed by another $149 million at $47.

Map those buys out against most of the NFLX chart for those years, and the Netflix management looks great — just like anyone else who bought NFLX in that time. But that’s the problem with crystal balls — they really tend to work best with hindsight.

Netflix will foot at least part of the bill for an unspecified number of new episodes, which will be produced by News Corp.’s 20th Century Fox studio (News Corp. also owns this Web site) and will start running in 2013. The new shows will be exclusive to Netflix streaming video subscribers, at least for its initial “window.”

That fits the content strategy CEO Reed Hastings has been laying out for a while: He wants to create an $8-a-month version of HBO, delivered over the Web, stocked with stuff you can’t get anywhere else.

That’s why Hastings has spent the last year or so cobbling together a slate of exclusive movie deals (like a recent DreamWorks pact) and TV shows (like a recent deal with CW), and that’s why he’s already committed to a deal to produce “House of Cards,” a new Kevin Spacey/David Fincher miniseries next year. At the same time, he is losing a Starz deal that gave him access to movies from Sony and Disney.

Netflix has been noodling with the notion of using digital distribution to revive dormant TV shows or extend the life of ones that are about to be canceled, for some time.

Others are contemplating the same thing: Producer Jeff Kwatinetz, for instance, is trying to get financing to film new episodes of two ABC soaps — “All My Children,” which went off the air in September; and “One Life to Live,” which goes off the air in January.

Saving old shows that couldn’t generate enough viewers to justify a broadcast network’s support, but which still have a loyal following, has particular appeal to Netflix. The company’s executives believe they can “algorithmically bring an audience to a show,” using recommendation engines, over an extended period of time.

In this case, the company is bringing back a show that’s been off the air for five years, but which still has a very vocal fan base. In October, show creator Mitchell Hurwitz said that “nine or 10″ new episodes of “Arrested Development” were in the works, which would function as a prelude to a to-be-filmed movie.

The gory first-person shooter has managed to outsell all movies, books and videogames during its initial debut.

It even surpassed last year’s release of Call of Duty: Black Ops, which grossed $650 million, and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, which sold $550 million.

In an interview, Activision Blizzard’s CEO Bobby Kotick told AllThingsD that the game’s entertainment value compares well against other more accessible media options.

“I don’t think we have empirical evidence to support this, but the cost per hour is a lot lower than any form of entertainment,” he said. “In this difficult economy, you are getting a great value.”

The latest installment, called Modern Warfare 3, retails for about $60 and is available on the Nintendo Wii, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and for the PC.

He said for that price, you get a social experience because of the multiplayer capabilities; a cinematic experience with good imagery and a story line; and an interactive experience. “It touches on all of the compelling areas of entertainment,” he said.

Activision is claiming that the Call of Duty franchise is one of the most valuable entertainment properties worldwide, having exceeded $6 billion in revenue over its lifetime. At that level, Kotick says, it is up there with “Star Wars,” the Harry Potter franchise, and maybe “Lord of the Rings.”

In its first day on the market, Activision sold more than 6.5 million units in North America and the United Kingdom at an estimated sell-through rate of more than $400 million.

It’s competing against a number of blockbuster first-person shooters that are being released this winter, like Electronic Arts’ Battlefield 3, which came out late last month. That title sold five million units during its first week of sales.

Not only is Call of Duty a big revenue hit, but it’s also likely sucking away time spent on other media.

According to Microsoft, more than 3.3 million unique gamers logged seven million multiplayer hours with the game by the end of Nov. 8, the first day it was available. At one point, more than 3.3 million concurrent users played the game on Xbox Live.

A companion social network for the game, called Call of Duty Elite, is being sold separately for $50 for premium access.

Kotick said Activision will release more information about sales on that soon, but “the response has been much higher than we anticipated.”

For our first-ever media conference, we’re trying to cast a wide net, so you’ll hear from movers and shakers from a range of companies. The common theme: All of them are making and distributing content during a time of unprecedented technological change. How do they adapt?

So far, we’ve announced that Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman, New York editor David Remnick, Warner Music chairman Edgar Bronfman Jr. and News Corp. chief operating officer Chase Carey will be joining us on Jan. 30 and 31 at the Ritz-Carlton in Laguna Nigel, just south of Los Angeles.

Let’s add three more to that list:

Bob Pittman helped build MTV, then AOL. And after spending several years as a full-time investor in everything from Zynga to a high-end tequila, he’s running a media company once again — this time overseeing radio and billboard giant Clear Channel. Why would you want to run a radio company when everyone’s consumed with the likes of iTunes, Pandora and Spotify? Because it’s still a growth industry, Pittman argues. And the fact that it’s the industry that gave him his start, at age 15, makes the story even more interesting.

Thomas Tull is a relative newcomer to Hollywood, but he’s moving fast. After founding Legendary Pictures in 2004, he’s produced a string of hits, including “The Hangover,” “The Dark Knight” and “300.” And if you accuse him of making dude-centric movies that appeal to “fanboys,” he won’t flinch — they’re the ones who still come out to the theaters, if you know how to get them there. Last spring, his track record helped him secure an investment from Silicon Valley heavyweight Accel Partners, which gives you a hint about where Tull thinks all of this is going.

Joint ventures formed by big media companies are a tricky proposition, but Rio Caraeff seems to be making his work. Vevo, the “Hulu for music videos,” is co-owned by Universal Music Group and Sony Music, and helped in large part by Google’s YouTube. And as of last month it was the second-biggest video site on the Web — a title that used to be held by Hulu.

Just like our flagship D: All Things Digital conference, D: Dive into Media will give you rare access to deep, smart talks with the people who matter. And we’ll be announcing more of them in the weeks to come. For now: You can find registration information here.

But instead of moving movies and TV shows to the world’s biggest Web site, they’re trying something different: Google is handing out more than $100 million to dozens of partners to create new “channels.”

The idea is to make “professional” content that advertisers will pay a premium to be near, instead of the grab bag of videos that dominate the site and that often sell at very low prices.

This isn’t news, of course: YouTube reps have been holding meetings and auditions for most of the year, led by former Netflix executive Robert Kyncl. And we’ve known about the deal terms, and many of the partners, for some time.

But now the site is finally talking about them publicly and promising that it will start unveiling some of the new programming next month. Some of the channels — each of which will have a couple hours of original programming per week — will feature people you’ve heard of, like Madonna, Jay-Z,  Ashton Kutcher and “Modern Family” star Sofia Vergara.

But the channels aren’t all premised around the idea of celebrities and Hollywood per se — just the idea that someone with some idea of how to make good stuff will start making stuff specifically for the site.

For instance, BedRocket Properties, the video start-up backed by the Huffington Post’s Ken Lerer and run by cable TV veteran Brian Bedol, will do four channels, including a soccer-themed channel in conjunction with Major League Soccer, and an action sports channel produced along with Wasserman Media Group.

Another example: IGN, the videogame Web site being spun off by News Corp., will produce a game-themed channel along with the Shine Group, the TV production house recently purchased by News Corp. (News Corp. also owns this Web site).

It’s worth noting that some of the channels will be run by people who are well-versed in creating Web video — and video for YouTube in particular. Machinima, for instance, which also specializes in game-themed stuff, is already one of YouTube’s most prolific partners, and essentially runs a network within YouTube’s network.

Maker Studios, which is producing three channels, is another outfit that already specializes in YouTube. And Demand Media went public this year, in part because it had figured out the art of cranking out Web videos very, very, quickly, at very, very low prices.

YouTube may not be releasing all of the channels and partners today, perhaps because it doesn’t actually have all of its deals signed yet. And at least one partner told me that some of the mechanics of the deals, like control of ad sales, had yet to be worked out.

That’s hard to imagine, given the amount of time that YouTube has been at this. But it’s also hard to imagine why you’d announce a big consumer-focused deal at the end of a Friday. So, who knows.

We do know the general outlines of the deals, though: Google will advance most of the creators up to $5 million, and in return will get commitments to produce a couple hours of programming a week for the channel. Once the programmers have earned back their advance from YouTube, they’ll split ad revenue with the site. The programming will be exclusive to YouTube for at least the first year of the three-year deals.

What we don’t know is how this stuff will actually work: $5 million won’t go very far if the partners use traditional TV and film budgets, so many of the partners are going to have to supplement that money with investments of their own — and they’re going to have to work on a tighter budget. And just because there’s a bit of Hollywood shine associated with this stuff doesn’t mean that people will actually watch — or, most crucially, that advertisers will pay up.

Google may also try other methods to get high-end video stuff. The company made a stab at Hulu when that video site was on the block. And it has indicated that it’s interested in licensing some content in international markets, where it thinks it can get more bang for its buck.

But now we’ll get Reed Hastings’s own report card, when Netflix announces its quarterly earnings this afternoon.

As Citigroup’s Mark Mahaney notes, the key numbers to look for aren’t the Q3 metrics — the company has already preannounced that its subscriber numbers are going to be lower than it initially thought — but its guidance for the rest of the year.

That’s where we’ll be able to see the impact of its many stumbles — the price hike, the broken Starz deal, Qwikster’s New Coke moment — or at least what Netflix thinks the impact will be. If Netflix subscribers are really bailing out — and not just threatening to do so on Hastings’s Facebook page — you should be able to see that reflected in its expectations for the next three months.

Remember that shortly after Netflix dropped its first bomb this summer — a 60 percent price hike for many of its customers — management predicted that it would suffer a subscriber blip in Q3, but would recover by Q4. Let’s see if they’ve hung on to that confidence.

Here are Mahaney’s best guesses for Netflix’s Q3 results and Q4 guidance, along with Wall Street’s estimates (click image to enlarge). I’ll be covering the results live at 4 pm ET.