This from TiVo's SEC filing for last quarter, which shows the company losing 314,000 subscribers in the period, capping more than year an a half of fairly steady decline. They lay claim to just 8% of the roughly 38m active DVRs in the US right now. This is not great.

The TiVo name is so common that most people don't have the sense of the turmoil behind it, but it's very, very real. TiVo's boxes, even if they are some of the best DVRs around, have started to feel stale in the past year, and for most people, cable-co-supplied boxes are simply Good Enough. Basically, they need something exciting, to customers and to TV providers, and they need it soon—that cascading cash river from Dish isn't going to flow forever. [TV By The Numbers via Crunchgear]

Hulu's corporate masters have reared their dragon heads from time to time in the past, like when it nuked Boxee and PS3 access, so you couldn't watch Hulu on your actual TV, and made it even harder to watch Hulu outside of the US.

Now, Hulu's blocking startup video discovery sites like Rippol, Yidio and Clicker from embedding its videos. Likely, again, because Hulu's content providers aren't too happy about somebody throwing all of that content into a single place that's not Hulu, even though theoretically, embedding is harmless—the video goods aren't being stolen, and Hulu still makes money off of the ads in the stream. I mean, we're talking about embedding here. This is about control.

And, given that Rupert Murdoch is publicly entertaining the idea of de-listing all of News Corp.'s content from Google (with Microsoft offering its own cash incentive to do so), a Hulu you have to pay for, or at least, is even more tightly controlled is more feasible than we'd like to think. (Hulu is a joint venture between Murdoch's News Corp. (which owns Fox), NBC Universal, and Disney (which owns ABC).

Ads, those I can deal with. Alec Baldwin's genius isn't free. Arbitrary restrictions that make it harder to watch what I want to—that, not so much. I'd rather watch nothing at all. I'm pretty lazy, after all. I can't even muster the energy to figure out when a TV show actually airs. (When does 30 Rock or Dexter run? I don't know.)

The way Hulu's going, it looks like I'm going to have a lot more time to play Modern Warfare 2. You know, TV dudes, the biggest entertainment event in history. The kind of thing that's pulling people away from their TVs, ripping their eyeballs away from the ads you sell to survive.

The sooner we quit Hulu, the less painful it'll be in the long run. [GigaOm]

Google's game here is obvious: by analyzing this anonymized sea of TiVo viewer data, they can help customers target their ads more accurately. Ad buyers also win, because they have a better sense of exactly how many people are actually seeing their ads. Guess who doesn't like this plan!:

Now, with TiVo's data, collected from millions of digital video recorders across the country, Google can tell exactly which of those commercials are being bypassed. If all the commercials are being skipped, the channel gets no money. It's easy to see why TV executives get heartburn over this.

Between my cable box's DVR function and my computer, I rarely watch live TV. And when I do, I usually end up flipping around during commercials. I know I'm not alone, and I know this is causing problems for networks, who are pushing more and more of their advertising into show, instead of between them.

Google, which already licenses similar data from Dish Network, is giving us a preview of how this kind of thing will work for everyone in the future—soon, data detailing what people are and aren't watching will be too present, too obvious to ignore, and networks will have to acknowledge that hey, nobody is watching ads anymore. In the long term this will make advertising more effective and efficient, but it could also kneecap TV ad sales as a whole. Or not! Says Google:

Our system makes it easy for people to buy TV ads. We're lowering the barriers to entry, which has the effect of growing the market.

Somehow I imagine "lowering the barriers for entry" isn't on the top of NBC's to-do list right now. Google will kill all. [LAT]

The Roku Channel Store is an open platform for delivering content to Roku boxes beyond the already-integrated Netflix, MLB.tv and Amazon channels. We all had high hopes for full-length streaming video, and rumors pointed to Hulu, but alas, it is not to be. The first ten "channels" were released today, and Hulu is not among them. The list:

Pandora, Facebook Photos, Revision3, Mediafly, TWiT, blip.tv, Flickr, FrameChannel, Motionbox and MobileTribe.

The Channel Store itself seems pretty open-ended, with a freely available SDK so developers can add to the Store's selection—and we hope they do, because these offerings are pretty meager at the moment. The Roku Channel Store is a free and automatic upgrade starting today, and works on all Roku devices, but there aren't any killer apps here (and neither Pandora nor Flickr is really a barn-burner at this point—at this point, every gadget I own, including my alarm clock, does that stuff). Here's hoping for some serious development efforts. Press release is below. [Roku]

Roku Launches Open Platform for Delivery of Content to the TV; Announces First 10 New Channels

Pandora, Facebook Photos, Revision3, Mediafly, TWiT, blip.tv, Flickr, FrameChannel, Motionbox and MobileTribe all now available on the Roku player

Silicon Valley, Calif. – November 23, 2009 – Roku, Inc., maker of the popular and award-winning family of Roku players, announced today the Roku Channel Store and the first 10 free channels for Roku customers to enjoy on their TVs. From internet radio to video podcasts, professional web content to photo sharing and personal videos, the Roku Channel Store provides an open platform for delivering quality content to the TV. New channels now available for customers to add today to their Roku experience via the Roku Channel Store include: Pandora, Facebook Photos, Revision3, Mediafly, TWiT, blip.tv, Flickr, FrameChannel, Motionbox and MobileTribe. For the complete list of channels and specific channel descriptions and features, please go to http://www.roku.com/roku-channel-store.

These first 10 channels are just the beginning for Roku. Many other developers are working on Roku Channels now, and Roku expects additional developers to adopt the Roku platform over time. New channels will appear in the Roku Channel Store automatically as they become available.

The Roku Channel Store represents an opportunity for content owners and publishers to reach an already large and growing audience of Roku customers. By creating an open platform for delivery to the television over the Internet, Roku has leveled the playing field for content owners.

"The Roku Channel Store turns the Roku player into the world's first open platform designed specifically for the TV," Anthony Wood, founder and CEO of Roku, Inc said. "Now content producers and distributors – from single person shops to billion dollar corporations – can deliver their content directly to consumers without having to go exclusively through cable operators, satellite networks or TV affiliates."

To create a channel for the Roku Channel Store, a developer creates an application using Roku's free software developer kit. This SDK is available free upon request by emailing partners@roku.com.

All Roku players, including the Roku SD, Roku HD and Roku HD-XR models, are compatible with the Roku Channel Store. The new channels are in addition to the existing Roku channels already available: Netflix (NASDAQ: NFLX), Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) Video On Demand and MLB.TV.

Pricing and availability

The Roku Channel Store will be delivered as an automatic and free upgrade to all existing Roku customers over the course of the next two weeks. New customers will automatically be upgraded when they first install their Roku player. To browse and use the Roku Channel Store, customers will be prompted to create a Roku account. Existing customers who do not want to wait for their Roku player to update automatically can manually update their Roku player immediately. Detailed instructions can be found under the Roku Channel Store tab at http://www.roku.com/support/faqs.

First introduced in May 2008, and updated regularly with free software updates, the Roku player family provides the easiest, most affordable and reliable way for hundreds of thousands of Roku customers to watch their favorite movies, TV shows and sporting events instantly on their TV. All three Roku players are available immediately at http://www.roku.com starting at $79.99 and include free shipping for a limited time.

About Roku, Inc.

Roku is a market leader in innovative applications for digital media, opening up a new world of entertainment to the TV. Through its work in both software and hardware, the company develops and sells consumer products that give customers the ability to take charge over their entertainment choices, combining high-value content and immediate access to that content at a low price. Its products include: The family of Roku players and the SoundBridge Internet radio line. Roku is privately held and based in Saratoga, Calif. For more information on the company and its products, visit: http://www.roku.com.

Is it just what they're showing us? A Flo TV app, that requires some kind of accessory to tune into broadcasts? That's possible, but given how well the iPhone can stream video over 3G, it'd be a hard sell, even with Flo TV's cable-like channel selection. It would also help if said accessory wasn't larger than the actual iPhone.

Or is it to foster excitement over the idea of native Flo TV hardware support in the iPhone, like in the HTC Imagio? Because that will never, ever happen. So again, why? [Electric Pig]

To be clear, we're only looking sets that are at least 46 inches—go big or go home. And though there are some nice 720p plasmas out there for amazing prices, the majority of TVs we're concerned with are 1080p—it's the standard now, even in cheap HDTVs, and probably the only resolution you'll see next year.

We focus on LCDs quite a bit here, not because we prefer them, but because there are key enhancements that can be put in LCD technology to make them look better. With plasma, the problems—energy consumption, weight, thickness—are more of an evolutionary, year-to-year thing. A cheaper plasma often is one that's just using older technology.

Also, we're using Amazon as our pricing base line, since it's on average a good standard for low but legitimate street prices, and we use Samsung examples a lot because they have a ton of different models on the market, so it was easier to isolate individual features, and to gauge subtle differences in pricing.

Size Matters

The first, and most obvious thing that'll cost you is more screen real estate. There's not an absolute inches to dollars ratio, but generally speaking, the first step up is the cheapest, and somewhere in the middle, there's a sweet spot, after which you basically lose money by upgrading. The funny thing is, each maker seems to have a different idea of where the sweet spot is, which you could play to your advantage:

Take for instance, Panasonic's plasma G10 series. It's $200 to go from the 42-inch model to 50, and then $400 to go up to 54. So the sweet spot is at 50 inches. Similar thing happening with Vizio's XVT line: Going from 42 to 47 inches is just $250, though going up to 55 from 47 costs about a a grand. Hence 47 inches makes the most dollar-per-inch sense if you like that TV.

With Sony and Samsung, though, it pays to keep going up. In Sony's top-of-the-line Bravia XBR9 series, the hop from 40 to 46 is $360, but going from 46 to 52 is just $250. Samsung's LED-backlit TV costs $350 to go from 40 to 46, and just $500 to go from there to 55 inches. (There's a limit, of course, Samsung's 65-inch LN65B650 doesn't have many of the frills discussed below, but still lists for $6000.)

The real lesson here: Don't think of size as a foregone conclusion. When you've narrowed down your options using all the criteria, go back and check the sizes and relative prices. There may be a surprise, hopefully good but possibly bad.

Vroom, Vroom

Everything after size you can roughly sweep everything you'd pay more for into the category of performance. The grand trick of buying TVs though, according to our friend Gary Merson of HD Guru, is that "the TV industry is setup like the car industry." Just like buying a Corvette to battle your mid-life crisis because it vrooms real good, when you pay extra money for extra horsepower, you're also going to get leather bucket seats and the in-dash GPS. It's hard to buy a stripped-down car that just delivers better performance, and the same goes when you're trying to scrimp on a TV without compromising picture. In the case of TVs, a higher performer might come with a million HDMI jacks or integrated Wi-Fi and video on demand, and you never know exactly what you're paying for.

Fortunately, we can break performance into a two major categories so it's slightly easier to interpret those price differentials: Backlight (for LCDs) and panel quality.

Fancy Backlighting

The single most expensive upgrade for LCD TVs right now is LED backlighting. As we explain here, there are a bunch of advantages to LED over conventional CCFL backlighting for LCD TVs. Which particular advantages you pick up depends on the kind of LED backlighting in the set. While both offer instant on and power savings, edge-lit models mainly deliver serious thinness, while backlit sets can offer local dimming, which delivers noticeably better black levels and contrast.

How much will it cost you? Well, comparing two Samsung sets with fairly equivalent panels, the price difference is about $500. The CCFL-backlit LN46B650 is $1360, while the UN46B6000 is $1850. Because it's got LED edge lighting, the B6000 is only 1.2 inches thick, compared to the B650's 3.1 inches. When you step up and compare Samsung's edge-lit to back-lit, the difference isn't as great: A 46-inch 8000 series edge-lit model goes for $2300, while the 8500 series with local-dimming is $2600. (If you're already paying for LED technology, you definitely want to step up.)

So yes, backlit LED sets with local dimming tend to cost more. Sony's year-old Bravia XBR8 uses tri-color LEDs to improve color accuracy over the most LED sets, which use white ones. Though its production is discontinued, it's still nearly $2200 at 46 inches. However, Toshiba consistently delivers cheaper sets than most of its fellow "name" brands, and their 46-inch LED backlit set with local dimming is just $1700.

Panels and Oh, It Hertz

The panel is the other major thing that determines how good an HDTV actually is, and it applies to both LCDs and plasmas. Typically, as you move up in price, you get a better panel. Cheaper sets generally use older panels with previous-generation tech that Merson says have a poorer viewing angle, so there's a smaller area you can actually stare at on your TV to get a good picture. The problem is that no TV manufacturer actually declares its panel attributes on the box, so you're often on your own to figure it out. The best way is to go to the store and check out the viewing angles.

Hertz, for the uninitiated, is simply the number of times per second that LCD TVs refresh their picture. (Plasma isn't part of this discussion because phosphor pixels work differently than liquid crystal ones, and plasma's "refresh rate" would be way higher—to the point of irrelevance.) A 60Hz LCD refreshes the picture 60 times a second, 120Hz is 120 times a second, and so on, up to 240Hz in the top-priced LCD sets. A higher refresh rate is supposed to increase the ability to see fast-moving video at its highest intended resolution, and works well in theory, though there are issues with 240Hz execution. At this point, a minimum of 120Hz is a given on all premium LCDs, says Merson. There isn't one LED-backlit set that doesn't have it.

Here's how the refresh-rate step-ups look: The 46-inch Samsung B550 is a standard 1080p CCFL-backlit set for $1020. Moving up to the same size B650 for $1360—$300 more—gets you 120Hz (plus a higher contrast ratio). Going up again, to the B750 for $1630, another $300, you get 240Hz, and again even better contrast ratio. That's about the top of Samsung's CCFL-backlit line.

You can see the same thing with their LED sets: The 46-inch B6000 is a 120Hz LED edge-lit set for $1850. The 46-inch LED edgel-lit B8000 goes to 240Hz, and it costs $2300, about $450 more.

What About Plasma?

As we mentioned, plasmas are a little less complicated, since there's nothing like refresh rates to deal with. On the other hand, the situation may be more obtuse, since you don't always know what the real differences are. Merson says there are a few basic levels of plasma performance. On Black Friday, Walmart is selling a 50-inch plasma for $598 if you don't mind the fact that it's 720p (and branded Sanyo, which is probably Panasonic-based but who knows?). Stepping up to the 50" 1080p plasmas will generally cost $300 to $400 more.

There are more issues, however. Panasonic has a new panel called NeoPDP that's more energy efficient, but it's sometimes hard to tell which models have it and which don't. (Hint: Look for the Energy Star sticker.) Finally, you have THX-certified panels that offer nearly perfect calibration right out of the box. Beyond that, contrast ratios do tend to get better over time, but it's relative: At the low end of the HDTV price spectrum, plasma sets have generally delivered better picture than LCD anyway.

Frills and Other Stuff

The funny thing about TVs nowadays is that there's more to them than the screen. Like inputs. Until recently, one thing you got more of by paying more money were more holes to stick things into. That's not really the case once you get up into 46-inch sets—you're gonna get 4 HDMI slots in a set that big no matter what. But, there are other things nowadays. Like video services that come in through other holes, or maybe without wires at all.

An example, to use our old friends at Samsung: The B6000 looks a lot like the B7000, but with the B7000, for $180 more, you get online video services via Yahoo's widget engine, like YouTube.

Or, let's look at the upcoming crop of LED TVs that aren't even out yet, or are in limited distribution for now. LG's 55LHX and Sony's Bravia XBR10 both have wireless HDMI and 240Hz, but with Bravia Internet Widgets and Slacker radio, the Bravia is $5000, $200 more than 55LHX. Wireless HDMI itself is a pretty pricey feature. Same Sony, compared to Samsung's 8500. The 8500 has built-in video services, but no wireless HDMI, and it's $500 cheaper, at $4500. Oh, and did I mention that the Sony is even 3 inches smaller than the Samsung and LG?

Wireless is still in the gimmick phase, but next year, we assume we'll be able to track its price premium as well as we can track size, refresh rate, backlighting and other factors today, $300 to $400 at a time. How do you get from $600 to a $6000? You just add, add some more, and then keep adding.

Still something you wanna know? Send questions about addition, subtraction, hertz, aches, pains and LEDs here, with "Giz Explains" in the subject line.

Samsung's Bada Mobile OS to Launch in Early 2010

Samsung's non-smartphone OS, which is surprisingly named Bada (rather than "Why?"), has already been announced, but now we hear that the first Bada phone should arrive in the first half of 2010. Given Samsung's recent dalliance with Android skins, maybe this is a new attempt to create something people might actually want to use. Still, we're just not that excited about another dumbphone OS, which is why news about Bada winds up here in the dark, forgotten corner of Gizmodo we call Remainders. [Engadget]

Google Talk Knows When You're on Android, and Likes It

The thing about Android is that we all depend on Google for all kinds of things, whether or not we ever plan on using an Android phone. So if Google wants, they can exert some pressure, through sweet exclusive features (like the Droid's turn-by-turn Maps) or little cues like this one. Google Talk now adds teeny adorable icons for Android users in the GTalk buddy list—but only Android, not iPhone, WebOS or BlackBerry. I'm not concerned about the "Google creep," but Google haters may find this seemingly innocuous feature a sign of trouble to come. [TechCrunch]

California Passes New Efficiency Standard for TVs

California, in a decision that's the first of its kind, passed a law requiring new, stricter efficiency standards for all TVs sold in the state. By 2011, they'll have to reduce energy requirements by 33%, and by 2013, that number goes up to 49%. It's not a huge deal, nor something consumers are likely to notice—but higher energy efficiency standards are okay in my book. The law has passed only in California, and is seeing a fair bit of opposition, so don't hold your breath for nationwide adoption—hence its place in Remainders today. [Mercury News]

Acer Ferrari Netbook's Tackiness Burns My Eyes

Okay seriously you guys, who the hell buys Ferrari versions of gadgets? They pop up with pretty alarming frequency given their eye-searing tackiness, and the latest victim is this humble Acer netbook. The netbook packs expected specs, including an AMD Athlon Neo processor at 1.2GHz, up to 4GB memory, 160GB hard drive and snoooooore. But why ruin that solid, sleep-inducing mediocrity with such shockingly garish styling? It'll be available in Japan on November 27th. [Akihabara News]

In case you forgot, Sezmi plans to roll up live broadcast and cable TV along with web videos, on demand-movies and DVR functionality in a single, easy to navigate set-top box. Needless to say, this is a tall order, and most of us probably relegated Sezmi to the vaporware bin. However, trials of the product have begun in LA and a $25 million cash infusion from investors has given the project new life. In fact, it seems that Sezmi spent the last year working out deals with the likes of Sony Pictures, MGM Studios, Paramount Studios, Warner Brothers, Lion's Gate Entertainment and Universal Studios for on demand streaming, and ABC, CBS, CW, FOX, NBC, Turner, MTV Networks Discovery Channel, Telemundo and Univision for TV content.

Sezmi plans to offer a tiered pricing plan that starts with Sezmi Select, the entry tier, which will offer all local channels (in SD and HD) as well as access to on-demand content for $4.99 per month. Sezmi Supreme will include cable and local channels for $24.99 per month.

If you are interested in participating in the trial, you can apply for the LA pilot here. If you are lucky enough to get in, the equipment and the service will be free of charge for three months, after which you will be offered a discounted price on the DVR and tuners which normally runs $300. [Sezmi via Variety and Zats]

Update now, says Apple. [TUAW]

In other words, bumping up the refresh rates beyond 60 Hz may have eliminated the problem of motion blur, but some complain that the activation of the ME/MC circuit that kicks in when LCD sets achieve these high refresh rates desegregates the picture. As the video put together by HDGuru illustrates, this is a very real problem.

That having been said, LCD buyers have a few options. Most sets offer an option to turn off ME/MC, although that will result in lower motion resolution. You could also opt for a plasma set that doesn't suffer from this issue. It also reinforces a point I made with yesterday's article—you don't need to spend extra money on a LCD just because it advertises 240Hz. You probably won't see any additional benefit with that set than you would with one that tops out at 120 Hz. Check out HDGuru for the full details and results of the test. [HDGuru]

For the record, the service used to cost $15/month. [AT&T]

But don't hold your breath on it happening yet: Peter Kafka has "yet to hear of a single programmer that has made a firm commitment." As he points out, while networks are constantly looking for new revenue, like those asshole aliens in Independence Day moving from world to world consuming every natural resource, they're nervous about the idea for a lot of reasons.

A lot of it has to do with the icky, sticky relationships between networks and cable operators, where everybody's worried about losing out as people start to watch more and more TV content online, not in their living room—where streaming video eats up bandwidth, and advertising revenues aren't nearly as rich (which is why Hulu wants to figure out new ways to get you to pay).

While these little complications might slow the process down, the exodus is inevitable. There's no stopping this. The internet is the new cable: Netflix, Hulu, BitTorrent. Apple might not get to launch it in a few months, but it will happen. Just give it time. The actually crazy part, if you ask me, is that the Apple TV might even live up to its name. [Hulu]

Warning: Clip is US-only. U-S-A! U-S-A!

At first glance I thought it was a black MacBook with a Windows logo pasted over the Apple, but that's not it—the case is too shiny and angular, looking more like a slick Lenovo or something. 30 Rock has been very obvious in its love of Apple products in the past, with Liz and Jack always using iPhones and the writers using MacBooks, so it's pretty surprising to see a Windows computer, even if it's an imaginary one. But 30 Rock has always been a little edgy about product placement anyway, once breaking the fourth wall to ask advertisers "Can we have our money now?" But hell, at least it's not at the point of the "Dr. Pepper Amuse Bouche Challenge" nonsense of Top Chef. [Hulu]

What kind of features would you need to see from Hulu before you can consider it a full cable replacement? Not one with caveats like Sean found, but one that does everything you want. No compromises as far as you're concerned. We don't know the cost yet, but let's assume Netflix-style pricing in the ballpark of $10-20 a month.

For me, I would need content available as soon as it airs (no delay), HD, a much wider selection of content, and set-top-box playback capability. At least.

If they meet those requirements, I might be willing to part with a few bucks a month and ditch my cable company entirely. What about you?

Hulu, the joint venture between News Corp.'s Fox, GE's NBC Universal and Disney's ABC, doesn't plan on charging people to watch the stuff it's currently airing on the site–a mix of first-run shows from broadcast TV, a limited number of cable TV shows and a smattering of movies. But Hulu is trying to figure out how to create some kind of premium offering where you'll pay for stuff that isn't on the site right now.

This jibes with Carey's adjacent reassurance that "not all content on Hulu would be behind a pay wall," which hints at the addition of some kind of subscription or pay-per-view system, that could conceivably leave current offerings untouched. This is a plausible possibility, but far from sure: Kafka's sources says Hulu doesn't actually have a plan yet, so anything is possible.

Plan or no plan, telling everyone what they aren't going to do would do Hulu good—vague threats of fees for "broadcast content" are just terrifying everyone. [AllThingsD]

Here's the money quote from NewsCorpian Chase Carey, so there's no confusion:

It's time to start getting paid for broadcast content online. I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content. I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value. Hulu concurs with that, it needs to evolve to have a meaningful subscription model as part of its business

An optimist might interpret this as a move toward tiered access, or even the decidedly good addition of paid premium content, like HBO and Showtime. But read carefully:

It's time to start getting paid for broadcast content online

It doesn't get any less premium than broadcast content, which is exactly what Carey says we'll soon be paying for—sometime in 2010, he supposes. (Though to be fair, there's a scrap of reassurance later in the same article: "not all content on Hulu would be behind a pay wall." Cool?) This is extra-extra-foreboding next to last week's statements about a paid Hulu from Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes, highlighted by TVBizwire: "That's not an if," he said "that's a when." It was fun while it lasted, I guess.

On a totally unrelated note, here are some neat articles, for pleasure reading!

Update: Reader Frank pinged Hulu about the issue, and got this not-quite-specific-enough-to-contradict-Carey's-statements response:

Don't worry, Hulu's mission has always been to help people find and enjoy the world's premium, professionally produced content. We continue to believe that the ad-supported, free service is the one that resonates most with the largest group of users and any possible new business models would serve to complement our
existing offering.

Thanks,

Betina Chan-Martin
Hulu

It's a purposely vague reassurance, but a definitive, public "we're not going to charge you for what is currently free" statement would be awfully easy to make, and would quell the concerns of people like Frank. Hint: They haven't made it. [Broadcasting Cable via TVBizwire]

The idea is simple, but the politics aren't. All white spaces networks do is stick data into the unused frequencies that neighbor television signals, but broadcasters are afraid that TV signals aren't robust enough to handle data being packed in so tightly. This trial will be the first real-world test of that belief.

Hopefully all will go well and the tech will be able to provide rural communities with the broadband they've been hurting for. [Ars Technica]

Image via FutureAtlas

The free online app allows you to select between a slew of page layouts, then drag and drop your favorite (mini) Marvel heroes into each panel. Of course can also add text, sound effects objects—whatever you need to flesh out that 4-part series you've always wanted to see in which a prepubescent Wolverine struggles to uncover the roots of his inexplicably persistent five o'clock shadow.

But the best part is that the whole system is vector based, meaning that you can enlarge any element (like characters) as much as you'd like before exporting your comic to a fairly high rez PDF (that's free from watermarks or any other stuff that could sour the experience).

Though, I must admit, I fear to see what your minds come up with in the comments. Please keep in mind that none of these superheroes are of age. [Marvel via GeekDad]

Heavy Haulers follows a family of structural movers as they race against the clock and battle extreme odds to move mansions, trains, planes, churches and ships hundreds of miles over treacherous terrain. No structure is too large for monster movers Jeremy Patterson, wife Tonya, 12-year old son Greg and 9-year old daughter Ashley, who built the business from the ground up and now move over 350 structures per year. The pilot episode follows the family's brave attempt to shift a 400-ton brick mansion five miles across Iowa under extreme weather conditions.

The pilot shows the Patterson moving a 400-ton brick mansion across Iowa, under extreme weather. Why and how the hell do you move an entire 400-ton brick mansion? I guess I'd have to tune in for the answer. Heavy Haulers premieres on TLC this Thursday at 10PM, right after the season six premiere of American Chopper. [TV Squad]