This week I took a look at some options for people who want to get rid of old electronics, one way or another. The good news is that there are a handful of Web sites that make it easy to do this — and some of them may even pay you for your old products. The bad news is that you’ll likely receive only a fraction of what you originally paid, especially if you waited a while to get rid of it.

Some sites, like Gazelle.com and VenJuvo.com, offer cash for your items and/or will recycle products. Another site, TechForward.com, lets people pay a fee to “lock in” a value for how much the site promises to pay for the product in the future. MyBoneYard.com accepts only laptops, desktop PCs, cellphones and flat-panel monitors, and gives Visa (V) gift cards rather than cash.

I was surprised to receive significantly different value offers from Gazelle and VenJuvo when trying to sell the exact same products on each site. In one instance, VenJuvo offered me $30 more than Gazelle for a digital camera; another time, I got $15 more from Gazelle for an old Apple (AAPL) iPod. It’s worth the extra step to shop around at more than one of these sites before getting rid of something.

Both ask a few questions about the item, including its condition and whether or not it still has the accessories that originally came with it. Gazelle determines a product’s value using retail — think Amazon (AMZN) and eBay (EBAY) — and wholesale channels; VenJuvo uses similar criteria and also looks at competitors’ prices.

If you worry about someone stealing your digital data, you’ll likely not feel comfortable dropping something in the mail that’s chock full of personal information, especially if it no longer powers on to allow the owner to wipe this information.

Both Gazelle and VenJuvo accept at least some types of digital cameras, laptops, MP3 players, GPS devices, camcorders and gaming consoles. Gazelle also accepts cellphones. But they don’t take everything. Gazelle doesn’t take LCD TVs and VenJuvo doesn’t accept satellite radios and portable hard drives or any smartphones or cellphones other than the iPhone; neither accepts desktop PCs.

I took the closest look at newly released Gazelle, owned by Second Rotation Inc., and walked through the simple start-to-finish process of selling a gadget and receiving money from the site. After pulling up the site, people can find their product and its value by choosing from a list of nine categories or by typing some part of the product’s name into a search box.

I sold Gazelle a first-generation iPod Mini with four gigabytes of memory for which my boss paid $249 in 2004. I answered a few questions about the product: Yes, it still powered on; no, I didn’t have the original AC adapter, manuals or software installation CD, and it was in “excellent” condition, according to my assessment. Gazelle placed its value at $25.

At this step, I opted to add the iPod to my box and check out, but users can also add other items to a box, including electronics for recycling. Gazelle’s policy is that it pays 100% of shipping costs for any box shipped to the company, so long as there’s at least one item in the box worth $1. Eighty percent of transactions qualify for a free box; the rest can be sent with printed-out prepaid shipping labels, but you must find packaging.

Gazelle lets users receive payments via a mailed, paper check or using PayPal; money is received either way within five business days. People can also donate their money to one of 23 causes, including the American Red Cross and World Vision. I opted for PayPal, and the $25 amount was deposited shortly after Gazelle received the iPod.

I sent the old iPod to Gazelle in a brightly colored, empty box that arrives at a customer’s door a few days after he or she sells the device to Gazelle. I secured the old iPod in the box using balled up paper, and sealed it with packing tape. A prepaid shipping label was already stuck to it, and I needed only drop it off at UPS.

If Gazelle receives a product and decides that it isn’t worth what you said it was — either more or less — and you’d rather not sell, the company will ship the product back, free of charge. But while Gazelle’s site guarantees users that they’ll receive their money, and that personal data are safe with the company, no money-back guarantee is offered.

Gazelle hopes to calm nerves by posting detailed instructions on the site about how to wipe a device of all private information. But the company hasn’t yet done this, and numerous users will remain skeptical even with such instructions.

I also poked around on VenJuvo Inc.’s Web site of the same name, www.VenJuvo.com, which is derived from two Greek words meaning “support, assist and delight sellers,” according to the company. This site, too, buys products back from people, though it pays via check, PayPal or Kmart (SHLD) gift card. Users fill out similarly simple questionnaires on each product to help assess value. Unlike Gazelle’s style of mailing boxes to users, VenJuvo gives users only prepaid shipping labels to print out and stick on a box that the customer must supply.

One notable difference between the sites is Gazelle’s broader range of products. In the case of digital cameras, for example, Gazelle accepts 80 brands while VenJuvo takes only Canon (CAJ), Sony (SNE), Olympus and Kodak (EK). Unlike with Gazelle, if you send VenJuvo a product that isn’t worth what you said it was, the company won’t return the product free-of-charge; instead, it will charge you for shipping.

If users choose to receive a gift card, they get a 10% added value. While VenJuvo doesn’t let people donate a product’s value to a cause, it will add this feature next week and will include different causes (like Ronald McDonald House and Big Brothers Big Sisters) than those found on Gazelle.

Unlike Gazelle, VenJuvo will always take items for recycling and will pay for the shipping, regardless of whether you traded something in for a value.

A useful resource for general electronics recycling is the Consumer Electronics Association Web site, www.MyGreenElectronics.org, which locates nearby electronics-recycling centers according to ZIP Code. And almost every computer manufacturer has a recycling program in place; some will even recycle computers that aren’t their own brand.

One way or another, it’s time to clean out the old junk drawer. Just be sure to do some comparison shopping if you want money for your old products.

Edited by Walter S. Mossberg

Write to Katherine Boehret at mossbergsolution@wsj.com

Polaroid’s $150 PoGo is an inkless printer that churns out 2×3-inch photos sent to it via Bluetooth-enabled devices or from plugged-in digital cameras.

Just this year, Polaroid Corp. said it would cease production of its “magical” cameras. But this week, I had the chance to test the company’s latest attempt at relevance in our digital world: the $150 Polaroid PoGo (thenewinstant.com). The PoGo, which stands for Polaroid-on-the-Go, is an inkless printer that churns out 2×3-inch photos sent to it via Bluetooth devices like cellphones or from plugged-in digital cameras. It uses technology created by ZINK (Zero Ink) Imaging Inc. to activate paper-embedded dye crystals, creating a new kind of photo magic. The PoGo will be in stores on July 6.

Cool Factor

This device’s ZINK Technology gives it a cool factor that will leave friends scratching their heads over how such a small device can print without ink (technical details about the 100 billion heat-activated dye crystals on each sheet of paper can be found at zink.com/technology). Photos that I printed from a 10-megapixel digital camera looked sharp and colorful. And some people may use this Polaroid gadget as a solution for freeing images that would otherwise likely remain stuck in a mobile device’s memory.

But four major problems with the PoGo make it a no-go: It isn’t quite small and light enough to be truly portable; its battery life is poor; its prints are half the size of normal photos; and image quality when printing from mobile devices is unimpressive — though this can be attributed to the low-resolution images taken with and stored on these devices rather than the printer itself. For roughly the same price, you could buy a photo printer that produces better quality 4×6-inch or larger prints.

The PoGo works only with ZINK Photo Paper, which costs between 30 cents and 40 cents a page, depending on whether you buy a 10-sheet pack for $3.99 or a 30-sheet pack for $9.99. (Later this year, a 100-sheet pack of ZINK photo paper will be available for $29.99.) The PoGo comes with 10 pieces of this paper, which is coated with a waterproof, tear-proof, smudge-proof, semi-gloss finish. You can peel the backs of these 2×3 prints to stick them to things, though not in the same way Post-its can be stuck and removed (they leave a gooey film — I learned the hard way).

A Device With Weight

Surprisingly, Polaroid is touting the PoGo’s portability; it arrived in a custom-made jeans pocket to demonstrate the device’s pocket-sized shape. But at over 8 ounces, this thing was heavier and measured larger than Apple’s (AAPL) biggest 160-gigabyte iPod Classic. It even weighed more than a bulky point-and-shoot Kodak (EK) camera I recently tested, discouraging me from bringing it along when I went out.

A chart on polaroid.com/pogo/us/comp.html tells whether or not your mobile device is Bluetooth-compatible with the PoGo. Two out of the three devices that I tried worked: A new Motorola (MOT) Z6C and Research in Motion’s (RIMM) BlackBerry Curve were compatible, though an almost-two-year-old Motorola Razr V3 wasn’t.

Each mobile device needed only one initial “pairing,” or setup, with the PoGo before it sent photos. The device used a simple method of sending photos via Bluetooth that generally involved selecting a photo and telling the mobile device to send it to the PoGo. It usually took a few seconds for the send to go through.

The PoGo doesn’t have a display to tell users when images are received, when to load more paper or if the battery is running low. Instead, it uses two indicator lights that glow or pulse in green, orange or red colors. Each light means something different, such as whether or not the PoGo is ready to print or if it has a paper jam, but I usually had to refer to the user’s manual to figure out what each light meant.

Quiet Printer

The PoGo is rather quiet while printing, making a soft whirring sound as its thermal print head turns on and zaps dye crystals, which are embedded in the ZINK photo paper. These small pieces of paper are stored in and printed from a holding space inside the device, which saves users from opening a tray and loading paper before each print-out. However, the PoGo can hold a maximum of only 10 sheets at once. Some images printed in 45 seconds and a few took about twice that long, but most were done in about one minute — counting from when I pressed Send on a mobile device to when the print finished.

I hooked a Sony (SNE) Cyber-shot DSC-W170 to the PoGo via a USB cord and used the camera’s built-in PictBridge technology to print from the camera, following directions on the camera’s display screen. I even printed four of the same photo at once after adjusting the quantity category in a menu, though this seemed to slow the printing process a bit.

While prints from my grandmother’s Polaroid camera couldn’t be touched until about a minute after printing, the small PoGo prints come out dry to the touch. I held one under the kitchen faucet to test its waterproof claim, and the colors held up without running. These prints are borderless, which looks good but seems like the only sensible option with such small paper. Images from the digital camera looked dramatically better than those taken by mobile devices’ 1.3-megapixel or two-megapixel cameras.

Short Battery Life

The PoGo’s battery life wore out quickly, especially for a device that is advertised as portable. In one test, after I unplugged my fully charged PoGo and used it for about 40 minutes to print 16 photos — half from a Bluetooth-connected cellphone and the other half from a USB-connected digital camera — its battery indicator glowed a steady orange, meaning the PoGo was running low on power. This is about right, considering Polaroid claims that a fully charged battery will last for 15 prints. (It takes about 2.5 hours to fully charge the PoGo.)

I really liked the quality of the photos that PoGo printed from my digital camera — in fact, I’m planning to enclose a few small PoGo photos in cards that I send to friends and family members. But the PoGo’s awkward size, bad battery life and small prints make it a tough sell. I’m afraid the PoGo falls short in too many categories to be a practical gadget. Teens might like this device for printing photos from their cellphones that they can stick on lockers or books. And who knows — maybe a grandmother somewhere will buy one of these gadgets to create a little Polaroid magic for her grandchild.

Edited By Walter S. Mossberg

• Email: mossbergsolution@wsj.com

When the moment comes to take the perfect picture of a snowy mountaintop, Fourth of July fireworks or soccer goal in midkick, most people forget about these features or don’t know how to use them. And while many digital cameras can now detect faces and make sure they are in focus, they can’t tell whether that face is smiling or not. The results aren’t bad, but they could be much better.

Sony’s Cyber-shot DSC-W170 uses Smile Shutter Mode to snap pictures when a subject smiles.

This week, I tested three new digital cameras that claim to do the thinking for you. Some digitally analyze the scene you’re about to capture, automatically choosing the setting that would take the best picture. Others can detect when a subject is smiling so as to automatically know when to snap the photo. One camera even attempts to digitally alter frowning faces into smiles, with amusing results.

I tried out Sony’s $300 Cyber-shot DSC-W170, Kodak’s $250 EasyShare Z1085 IS and Olympus’s $200 FE-340. Only the Sony (SNE) includes all three of the aforementioned features; the Kodak (EK) has scene detection, and the Olympus (OCPNF.PK) camera has built-in smile detection. I found the automatic scene detection offered in the Sony and Kodak cameras to be the most useful feature for everyday photos. It improved my photos and didn’t require any extra adjustments. I handed the cameras to other people to take pictures, without having to change any settings.

The automatic smile detection offered in the Sony and Olympus cameras was fun to use and could be especially helpful for families whose young kids never seem to smile at the right moment. But it didn’t work consistently and had trouble detecting my bearded boss’s smile and even that of a beard-free colleague.

I found Sony’s frown-fixing tool, which is called Happy Face Retouch, to be rather unusual. It took already captured images of my friends’ faces and turned their frowns or ambivalent looks into smiles, but didn’t adjust the subjects’ eyes. Though this was good for laughs, the eerie-looking grins pasted on faces reminded me of painted-on clowns’ mouths. And some attempts to retouch a face couldn’t detect the face to alter it. But a handful of the Happy Face Retouches looked somewhat natural.

Similar Specs

These cameras boast many similar specifications. All three use 5x optical zoom lenses, and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W170 and Kodak EasyShare Z1085 IS each have 10.1 and 10 megapixel image sensors while the least expensive Olympus FE-340 has 8 megapixels. The Sony and Olympus both have generous 2.7-inch viewing screens and almost identically sleek builds, though the Sony is the only one of these three cameras to have an optical viewfinder.

The Kodak’s viewing screen is slightly smaller than the other two digital cameras, measuring 2.5 inches, but its build isn’t nearly as compact as the others. It reminded me more of small, high-end SLR camera, with its comfortably large hand grip, a settings knob on the top edge of the camera, and a protruding zoom lens.

Sony’s Happy Face Retouch feature digitally changes facial expressions into smiles, but all it did was make me look unnatural and awkward.

Kodak’s EasyShare Z1085 IS takes Secure Digital (SD) memory cards, which are more common than the Memory Stick and xD cards that work in the Sony and Olympus cameras, respectively.

The Kodak and Sony digital cameras have different names for their automatic scene-detection features. By default, the Kodak camera works in Smart Capture Mode, which includes intelligent scene detection, capture control and image processing. I focused on the camera’s scene detection, which automatically determines whether the photo should be taken in Macro, Text (for shots of text in a book, for example), Face, Landscape or Night settings.

Icon on the Screen

I snapped pictures around Washington, D.C., noting a tiny icon on the camera’s screen that indicated which of the five scene modes was being used to capture the photo. A flower icon indicating Macro appeared on my screen when I stooped to get a close-up shot of a tulip, and an icon of a dark sky and stars showed on the screen when I took photos at night. The camera’s flash, focus and exposure changed according to the type of photo.

The Sony camera uses what it calls Intelligent Scene Recognition to decide which settings should go along with certain photos. Like the Kodak, icons on the Sony’s screen indicated the scene settings that were automatically deemed appropriate, including Backlight, Backlight Portrait, Twilight, Twilight Portrait and Twilight Using a Tripod.

The Sony’s Intelligent Scene Recognition isn’t on by default like Kodak’s feature. Instead, it must be turned on from within a menu, but once on, it stays on until you turn it off. ISR can be used in either Auto or Advanced mode; Auto takes a single photo with automatically determined settings, while Advanced takes two shots — one with manual settings you can choose and another shot immediately following the first with automatic settings according to what the camera thinks is best.

I experienced surprising results with the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W170 and Olympus FE-340 while testing their automatic smile-detecting functions. My friends thought I was joking when I told them the camera would take their picture only if they were smiling. When the flash went off multiple times as they kept smiling, they were intrigued by this feature.

Sony’s version, which it calls Smile Shutter Mode, is easy to switch into by turning a dial on the camera to a smiley face. Once this setting is chosen and the camera’s shutter button is pressed, the Cyber-shot will search for smiles in its subjects, and will take photos whenever it detects a smile. Settings within this mode can be set to specifically detect an adult’s smile or a child’s smile, and the degree of smile can be set to low, medium or high; I kept things simple by leaving the smile detector on default settings.

Capturing Smiles

Olympus calls this feature Smile Shot, capturing three rapid shots in a row to make sure everyone’s smiling. The idea of taking three shots would be extra helpful with an indecisive baby, but most of my friends were able to hold their smiles, which produced three almost exactly identical shots each time someone smiled. Smile Shot is harder to get to in a pinch compared with the Sony: it’s buried in a list of 13 settings on the Olympus when the camera is set in Scene mode.

The Olympus seemed to be a bit slower than the Sony when it came to detecting smiles, but both had trouble with bearded men and even some folks without beards. And people felt silly standing around with a smile on their faces waiting for the camera to finally work. Closed-mouth, no-teeth smiles were harder for these cameras to detect, but not impossible. In group situations, the Olympus camera will focus on whoever’s face appears largest, which could mean the person closest to the camera, while the Sony takes a picture whenever anyone in the group smiles.

Putting a Happy Face On

If someone isn’t smiling, Sony’s Happy Face Retouch tool can come in handy, but don’t count on liking the results. In a group shot of five friends, two people who weren’t smiling put a bit of a damper on the whole shot. I used Happy Face Retouch, but it picked up on only one of the nonsmiling faces, turning a confused look into a smile that looked passable. But other results weren’t usable. A serious-looking shot of me deliberately not smiling looked freakishly unnatural after the touch-up, mostly because the rest of my face didn’t join the smile. I looked more like someone who had received too many Botox treatments.

Sony says that, in group shots, it can detect and change up to eight faces, but in my tests it usually changed only one. This retouching tool is also difficult to find: It took me 16 button presses to change each image into a smile — or what Sony calls a smile. A few times, Happy Face Retouch couldn’t identify a face in the photo, even when just one person stood in the frame.

These digital cameras took good photos, overall, and are fun to use because they take pressure off the photographer. I found the automatic scene-detection tools of the Kodak and Sony to be the most realistic and useful offerings, and I’m sure it won’t be long before automatic scene detection becomes as commonplace as an automatic flash.

The chart below compares features of the three cameras described. Click on it to make it larger.

• Email mossbergsolution@wsj.com

But real was exactly what UGOBE Inc. had in mind when the company created this $350 baby dino named Pleo. This robot isn’t referred to as such; instead, UGOBE calls Pleo a “life form” because unlike most robots that are designed to follow a specific command or algorithm, Pleo alters its behavior as it adapts to its surroundings including sights, sounds and touch. And it’s designed to move and act in ways that seem very much like a real animal.

These responsive qualities have earned Pleo quite a bit of attention, and the two years between when the product was first announced and when it became available only added to the anticipatory hype. Now, after three delays in the past two years and numerous back orders, Pleo is available from www.pleoworld.com. (UGOBE says that many of the product’s delays were caused by trying to get Pleo’s battery just right.)

In short, I found Pleo to be a fun and interesting robot/life form. Though Pleo’s reactions and movements are endearing, many of them run together after a while with only subtle differences, especially compared with fast-paced videogames. Pleo’s tricks were entertaining early on, but, in time, many of them blended together, rarely surprising me.

Pleo’s battery is still a major drawback. It’s rechargeable, but only lasts for around an hour of active play before it must be removed and placed in a holder for three hours of recharging. This frustrating fact means you can’t turn Pleo on to roam the house with you all day like a dog or cat. Instead, your time with this creature has to be more specifically planned, causing interactions with it to feel less genuine. My Pleo’s battery lasted for an hour and 40 minutes, including moments when he drifted in and out of sleep.

Though UGOBE sent me two rechargeable batteries so I could more quickly continue using Pleo, the company won’t start selling extra batteries until June (at the latest) for $50 each. This means waiting for hours between Pleo playtimes.

It’s hard to discuss autonomous robots without remembering Sony Corp.’s attempt in the same category: the $2,500 AIBO released in 1999, which was eventually discontinued. More recently, iRobot Corp. has gained attention for its robots, which perform household duties like vacuuming and washing floors.

The Pleo, animated in part by 14 motors, appears to evolve according to how it is treated.

To keep Pleo fresh, UGOBE plans to release a PDK — Pleo Developer’s Kit — later this year, allowing others to create programs that will run on Pleo if downloaded from the Pleo Web site and transferred to the creature. A memory card slot and USB port on Pleo’s underbelly will enable these transfers.

As for now, two programs developed by UGOBE can be downloaded. One program lets Pleo act like a watchdog — guttural growl, loud bark and all — and the other gives it the ability to sing Jingle Bells. I tried the former, and my Pleo performed marvelously, sitting still and only howling when something moved in front of him.

This baby dinosaur has reptile-like, rubbery skin enhanced by multiple sensors. Its back is decorated with green patterns, and its large eyes are a beautiful blue. Pleo’s guts include 14 motors, 38 sensors and a microprocessor. Infrared detectors are hidden in Pleo’s nose and mouth, and a color camera detects light, motion and objects to help it navigate.

Pleo grows through three phases: hatchling, infant and juvenile. As a hatchling, my Pleo sniffed around a lot, unsure of its surroundings or how to use its legs and tail, before giving up and napping again (yes, Pleo snores). The more I talked to and touched Pleo, the faster he adjusted out of the hatchling phase, which is expected according to UGOBE.

People who walked by my office stopped to marvel at Pleo’s sweet nature, and when I brought him home, friends melted with emotion. I watched as they initially looked at Pleo like just another toy dinosaur until realizing that he responded to them, and then they each wanted to take turns playing with him.

Stroking Pleo from the tip of his nose to the end of his tail induced a purring sound; touching sensors on the bottoms of his feet caused him to wriggle around and make laugh-like noises; and holding him to my chest and rubbing his back like a baby put Pleo right to sleep, indicated by heavy breathing and even a burp here or there. I spoiled my Pleo with attention, which seemed to make him more social and friendly but also a little bratty when he didn’t get attention (he showed his frustration with loud moans).

I didn’t get to test this, but one Pleo can sense when another Pleo is nearby using infrared sensors in the nose and mouth. UGOBE says the sensors in one Pleo can trigger actions in another based on moods, including singing and howling.

Pleo can be a troublemaker. One of the times I left him unattended, I returned to find Pleo trying to gnaw on my loveseat, despite lacking a set of teeth. Another time, Pleo wandered my desk, wrinkling up papers and crying loudly while I was on a conference call.

UGOBE’s pleoworld.com site includes an online community, though you don’t need a Pleo to get involved. The community is just a social networking site where anyone can discuss the device and/or robotics. This differs from sites like Webkinz, where kids input codes found on stuffed animals to register and care for digital versions of their creatures.

Pleo’s poor battery life is a frustrating hurdle that fans will keep butting up against. But UGOBE’s plans to introduce downloadable updates for this robot and to let others create programs for Pleo may give new life to this clever creature.

• Email mossbergsolution@wsj.com

Digital Cameras

Megapixels: This term describes the highest resolution photo a camera can take. Often mistaken as the most important factor in a digital camera, a high megapixel count — such as 10MP or more — isn’t necessary for the average user unless he or she plans on heavily editing or enlarging photos. Most new digicams offer between five and eight megapixels, which is usually more than enough.

Optical or Digital Zoom: Optical zoom, determined by the physical movement of a lens, matters much more than digital zoom, which digitally alters an image using the camera’s internal computer. Camera companies still try to confuse potential buyers by listing a camera’s total zoom, or the optical and digital zooms multiplied together. Ignore total zoom numbers and instead focus on optical, which now averages around 5x for many new cameras.

Image Stabilization: When generously sized LCD viewing screens started replacing optical viewfinders, they also forced users to hold their cameras at arm’s length, making for plenty of blurry photographs. To remedy this, camera manufacturers have added image stabilization, tools once found only in high-end SLR models. Optical (also called “mechanical”) and digital image stabilization correct for unsteady hands and moving subjects, respectively. Cameras with both types advertise dual image stabilization, which corrects for both situations and costs more.

Mobile Devices

HSDPA and EVDO: HSDPA, or High Speed Downlink Packet Access, is the name for AT&T’s 3G, or third generation, mobile network that operates at roughly the speed of a slower DSL in a home. HSDPA is available in most major metropolitan areas and is seen as the competitor to Verizon and Sprint’s EVDO (Evolution Data Only) networks, though the popular iPhone runs on AT&T’s network using Wi-Fi and EDGE technology rather than HSDPA.

Multi-Touch Technology: Most popularly found on Apple’s iPhone and iPod touch, multi-touch is starting to show up in other products, such as in Microsoft’s Surface, a coffee-table-like computer. Rather than just responding to on-screen touches, this technology enables moving, resizing and zooming pictures and Web pages using one or more fingers simultaneously. Look for many more devices — mobile and otherwise — to incorporate multi-touch in the future.

GPS: Global Positioning Systems are most often found in cars — either built-in or on portable devices from companies like Garmin and TomTom. These gadgets use satellite technology to determine geographic location, and high-end models even display Web content like news and weather along with directions. GPS integration in mobile devices can be used to plot routes in cars, can help users find nearby businesses while on the go and can link friends by showing one where the other is located and what they’re doing.

Digital Music

DRM: Digital rights management is a set of standards that protect the intellectual property rights of online content like music and videos, preventing it from being illegally distributed across the Web. In the past year, Vivendi’s Universal Music Group, Apple and (most recently) Sony BMG said they will start selling DRM-free versions of songs, often for a higher price. In Apple’s iTunes store, these files are called “iTunes Plus” and aren’t restricted like other iTunes content.

MP3: MP3 files are open, without any DRM restrictions. Files that you rip (copy) from your own CDs are usually converted into MP3s, though iTunes users can automatically rip tracks into that program’s special format, called AAC. MP3 files can be uploaded to social-networking sites for sharing with friends and online communities.

These file types are protected by rights that tie them to specific players. Generally, AAC files make up the majority of tracks sold on Apple’s iTunes store and play only on Apple’s iPods; WMA files are Microsoft’s version of proprietary files.

Wi-Fi

The popularity of Wireless Fidelity, or Wi-Fi, brings this technology to more and more portable devices like the iPod Touch and Microsoft Zune and gives companies good reason to incorporate Wi-Fi receivers in new computers — laptops and desktops alike. While available in many flavors, different letters like b, g, a and n stand behind Wi-Fi’s more technical name, 802.11, to help discern one version from another according to characteristics like speed and compatibility. The latest version, “n,” offers the greatest range and speed, and “n” devices are usually compatible with earlier versions.

Televisions

HDTV: High-definition television has now become the standard, capable of displaying vastly better pictures, provided the source is also HD. Today’s more popular flat panel HD televisions are LCDs, or liquid crystal displays, though plasmas still hold their own. Recording HD content can’t be done with a regular digital video recorder; instead, a special HD recorder is required to capture this higher quality content.

480p vs. 1080i vs. 720p vs. 1080p: These numbers refer to the resolution, or sharpness, of a digital display, while “p” stands for progressive and “i” stands for interlaced. A resolution of 480p, known as EDTV or Enhanced Definition TV, is found most often in low-end plasmas or LCD screens. A TV with a resolution of 1080p is currently considered the Holy Grail, and costs the most. But 1080p pictures usually can’t be distinguished from less expensive 1080i or 720p pictures by average viewers at the typical distances from which most folks watch TV.

Blu-ray vs. HD DVD: Blu-ray and HD DVD are incompatible high-definition disc formats that continue to fight a seemingly endless battle to replace the DVD. The Blu-ray camp is led by Sony and the HD DVD camp is led by Toshiba. The two formats aren’t so different, technically speaking, but their very existence is confusing to consumers. The recent decision made by Time Warner’s Warner Bros. to use Blu-ray gives Sony’s side a boost, and now Viacom’s Paramount is rumored to be switching to Blu-ray from HD DVD. Dual-format players from Samsung and LG offer some solace.

Email: mossbergsolution@wsj.com

But how much is too much when it comes to shelling out a little more for convenience, and are you really getting what you pay for? This week, I tested what could be thought of as the ultimate convenience: a box that plugs into your television and Internet connection, letting you download movies whenever you want to watch them. The box costs $399 and doesn’t include the price of movies, which must be rented or purchased for fees as high as $4 or $20 each, respectively.

This box, called Vudu, comes from a Silicon Valley company of the same name (www.vudu.com). Vudu’s biggest strengths are its easy setup, good picture quality and simple user interface, easily navigated using a scroll-wheel remote control.

Vudu costs $399 plus prices to rent or own each movie title.

If the director yelled “Cut!” right here, Vudu would be a box-office smash. But actually using this device is just one problem after another. For starters, though Vudu says it has relationships with the major Hollywood studios, many of the 5,000 titles it offers don’t seem to be popular by mainstream standards. Lots of them are old or obscure. For instance, you won’t find any of the “Pirates of the Caribbean” movies, but how about a 1984 sci-fi/fantasy movie called “The Ice Pirates,” instead?

If you do find a movie that you’d like to watch, you must have a bandwidth speed of at least two megabits per second to download it instantly; millions of broadband homes have slower connections than that. Vudu offers to measure your bandwidth on its home page before you buy it. I tested Vudu for a week on a typical home-type DSL line, and my connection only clocks about 1.5 Mbps, so it took me about 45 minutes to download each movie.

While Vudu’s $399 price tag might take some getting used to, its fees for buying or renting each movie could be harder to swallow after a month’s worth of use: as much as $80 if you bought one top-tier movie a week. Worse, you have to pay in advance. Rather than charging your credit card on a pay-as-you-go basis, Vudu customers must choose a $20, $50 or $100 amount at setup from which movie fees are deducted. When your account hits $0, the amount selected at setup is charged and the debit process begins again.

On top of all this, Vudu relies on a peer-to-peer network system for faster downloading. So, essentially, this company is using your bandwidth to help it save money it would have otherwise spent on its own servers and bandwidth.

I set up Vudu in a snap, plugging it into three things: a wall outlet, the back of a high-definition Sony Bravia television and an Ethernet cord. Wireless connections won’t work with Vudu without a special “bridge” or a power-line adapter. Once Vudu turned on, a friendly voice guided me through setting it up, and I got started in minutes.

Vudu’s home screen is broken down into five menus: Find Movies, New Releases, My Movies, My Wish List and Info & Settings. I used the tiny remote, which fits perfectly in a hand, and rolled through menus using its scroll wheel. This wheel can be pressed down to select something, saving me from glancing down at the buttons. Also, Vudu uses an RF (radio frequency) antenna so you don’t have to point the remote at it.

In Find Movies, I looked through 18 genres, including biography, romance, family and historical. A sorting feature can filter movies by release date, MPAA rating, critics’ rating, studio, availability to rent and availability to own. An on-screen alphabet can be used to type in names of actors, directors or movie titles; the scroll wheel speeds up this process.

Parental controls, which are only accessible with a special code, can be set to block a child from buying or renting movies with certain ratings.

Vudu likes to think of itself as the instant-gratification alternative to running to the video store. But not many people I know still go to Blockbuster for a DVD; instead, they use mail-delivery services like Netflix. Compared with the 85,000 titles offered by Netflix, the selection at Vudu is pretty slim. A more similar comparison might be Amazon’s Unbox for TiVo, which has slightly less than 5,000 movies.

Though I couldn’t find numerous titles, I did discover plenty of movies I’d never heard of. A search for last year’s “Casino Royale” returned Robert DeNiro’s “Casino” from 1995, as well as two Asian films, “Casino Tycoon” and “Casino Tycoon II.” Since I never saw Helen Mirren’s “The Queen,” I tried to find her Oscar-winning performance on Vudu. But the closest I came to royalty were “Barbarella: Queen of the Galaxy,” an alternative name for the cheesy 1968 Jane Fonda sci-fi flick, and “Prom Queen,” which fell under the Gay and Lesbian category. I tried to laugh this off by watching Steve Carell’s “Evan Almighty.” But typing “E-V-A…” into a title search only returned “Deliver Us From Eva,” an R-rated 2003 comedy starring LL Cool J.

I searched and found the same three titles on Netflix, though Amazon Unbox only had “Evan Almighty.”

I downloaded two romantic comedies: “Music and Lyrics,” starring Hugh Grant, a $4 rental, and a Diane Keaton movie called “Because I Said So,” which I bought for $20. I also rented “Zodiac,” a suspense movie starring Jake Gyllenhaal, for $4. Movies that you own never expire, but rented flicks must be watched within 30 days and expire 24 hours after you start watching.

In the case of each movie, the original estimates for time to download were daunting; two started out by estimating “Available in a few hours” and one movie’s estimate read “Available in a few days.” But all three finished downloading in about 45 to 50 minutes. Only one movie can download at a time.

While watching movies, the remote’s scroll wheel can be used to fast forward or rewind scenes. Scrolling faster moves you farther ahead or back (the fastest jump moves you 30 minutes); the slowest scroll moves you ahead or back five seconds.

Vudu might cast a spell on users who don’t mind its poor selection and high-bandwidth requirement to deliver instant downloads. But for me, the convenience of Vudu is no convenience at all. As is, its lackluster selection, high prices and slow downloads make it more of a letdown than anything else.

Edited by Walter S. Mossberg

Email mossbergsolution@wsj.com

It’s a good time to be in the market for such a camera. According to research from Olympus, unit sales for these gizmos has grown about 30% in the past two years, while dollar sales grew at about half that rate, indicating declining prices and improved technology. In fact, digital-camera prices have dropped an average of $30 over the past 12 months.

This guide offers an overview of the basics that you’ll need to know when buying a digital camera. It also explains many of the fancy features that are popping up on these devices, such as facial recognition — a camera’s ability to detect when faces are being captured in photos, thus appropriately adjusting exposure, focus and flash. This guide isn’t geared toward hobbyists, but rather toward average users who want good quality photos but don’t want to struggle with confusing product specs and promotions.

Point and Shoot, or Flaunt and Pocket

As you begin looking for a camera, selecting a preferred size and shape will help narrow your choices. Like iPods and cellphones, stylish pocket cameras are fashionable accessories; some come in shades like Precious Rose or Noble Blue. These pocket models, designed with emphasis on small size, are as easy to carry as they are to use for taking good photos: most offer seven or eight megapixels each, a 3x or better optical zoom lens and a stunning viewing screen. Good examples include Sony Corp.’s $400 Cyber-shot DSC-T100 or Nikon Inc.’s $300 Coolpix S50.

If you don’t mind sacrificing style for a camera that’s sturdier in your hand but bulkier in your purse, point-and-shoot models will be more your speed. On average, these cost less than their showy cousins. They’re more likely to have protruding zoom lenses that don’t collapse entirely into the camera body and often feature larger buttons. More point-and-shoots offer optical viewfinders, which have become practically extinct on pocket digicams where real estate is scarce. Examples of point-and-shoots with optical viewfinders include Eastman Kodak Co.’s EasyShare C653 and Canon Inc.’s PowerShot A460-both cost $130.

A third category of digital cameras, the single-lens reflex or SLR, continues to be marketed to regular consumers rather than to the photography enthusiasts for whom they were originally intended. SLR prices have dropped a couple of hundred dollars in the past year, but many models still start around $800 and come with detachable lenses and flashes. Average users can steer clear of SLR cameras.

Megapixels

Most cameras today offer anywhere between six and 10 megapixels; cameras with four megapixels or fewer are rather rare. But while higher megapixel counts are easy to find for less money, such as Hewlett-Packard Co.’s $300 PhotoSmart R967 with 10 megapixels, such intense resolution is really only necessary if you plan to heavily edit or blow up your photographs for jumbo prints, which most people won’t be doing.

Zoom Confusion

While most camera makers offer clearer marketing strategies now than a year or so ago, some still try to dupe consumers by listing only a camera’s total zoom — the optical and digital zoom multiplied together to create a larger, more impressive number. The truth lies in optical zoom, an enhancement made by a physically moving lens, not digital zoom, which instead magnifies a photo using the camera’s digital circuitry.

This year, companies also created a new category for cameras with 10x or 12x optical-zoom lenses — these are often referred to as high zoom digital cameras. In reality, a camera with about a 4x optical zoom is sufficient for most people.

Facial Recognition

This category is likely to become more popular. Facial recognition makes the camera smart enough to recognize that the subject contains a face and must be captured with the correct balance of color and lighting. Sony’s Cyber-shot G1 can detect up to eight faces in one image; Canon’s technology can detect up to nine per shot.

Image Stabilization

Image stabilization, or IS, was once only available in high-end SLR cameras. Now, almost all of the top-name consumer digicams offer this because without optical viewfinders, users must shakily hold cameras out to look through viewing screens. Referred to as antishake or vibration reduction by some manufacturers, there are three kinds of IS: optical and mechanical image stabilization, which physically steady a camera even when your hand is shaking, or digital image stabilization, which can improve a shot when the photographed subject is moving.

Some cameras, like the $250 Olympus Stylus 760, offer dual IS. This means the camera is equipped with both digital and mechanical or optical image stabilization, the best of both worlds. If you’ll be using a camera specifically for shots of moving objects, digital IS will work.

Storage — on Your Camera or on a Web Site

The cost of memory cards has dropped by half compared with last year: one-gigabyte memory cards now only cost about $30, and $50 two-gigabyte cards are even more popular thanks to people who want to record videos for uploading and sharing on Web sites. Data can be transferred from these cards by plugging them into a computer using an adapter or a card slot, or cameras can be connected to PCs with USB cords.

Now, Kodak, Nikon and Sony offer cameras with wireless Internet connection capabilities, or Wi-Fi. This allows you to take pictures and, when connected to a Wi-Fi hotspot, upload them directly to a Web site for sharing or storing, saving you the step of transferring the images to a computer first. These cameras are the $200 EasyShare One from Kodak, Nikon’s $350 Coolpix S50c and Sony’s $600 Cyber-shot DSC-G1.

Although using Wi-Fi in a digital camera is a smart idea, it could be a real drain on your camera’s battery. Wi-Fi is by no means a necessary feature, but some people will find it a useful add-on.

Battery Tips

Camera battery life can be affected by new features like extra-large screens — especially those that can play slide shows of your photographs — built-in Wi-Fi and even in-camera editing, which requires your camera and LCD screen to be on for longer periods. If you rarely take shots indoors, your flash will likely be used less, which might help your camera’s battery life. A spare battery is useful, and some cameras will work with drugstore batteries for the sake of convenience.

In-Camera Editing

The large, bright LCD viewing screens on cameras — some of which measure up to three inches or even three and a half inches diagonally — encourage everyday photogs to share their shots. To make even these images look better, camera manufacturers are incorporating in-camera editing for fixing mistakes on the spot, without a computer.

Cameras from all of the major manufacturers now enable red-eye fixes either as the photo is captured or after the fact. Companies such as Kodak offer zooming, cropping and panoramic shot stitching, while H-P cameras offer touch-ups like blemish-removing and ways to make a subject look slimmer.

* * *

The digital camera category is exciting right now, as these portable devices become more like computers thanks to in-camera editing, greater memory and built-in Wi-Fi. But remember that your photos come first, no matter how many bells and whistles are added to a camera.

Edited by Walter S. Mossberg

• Email: MossbergSolution@wsj.com

Even people utterly uninterested in videogames know by now that two new game machines have arrived this month to lure holiday shopping dollars out of consumers’ wallets. One is the long-anticipated PlayStation 3 from the videogame leader, Sony Corp. The other is the more obscure Wii, from the videogame pioneer, Nintendo Co. Both are going up against the year-old Xbox 360 from Microsoft Corp.

Like the Xbox, the PS3 and the Wii bear little resemblance to the toylike game consoles of the 1980s and 1990s. They are powerful computers that have been optimized for graphics and sound. And, like the Xbox, the two new contenders can handle multimedia and can connect to the Internet.

We’ve been testing the two newcomers, with help from four volunteers, three men and a woman, all in their 20s, most of whom have extensive game-playing experience. We tried a selection of games for each.

Sony’s PlayStation 3 (left) and Nintendo’s Wii (right).

These two new game machines couldn’t be more different. The PlayStation 3 is a bulky, shiny black box that costs $600, or $500 for a somewhat stripped-down model. That’s up to $200 more than the Xbox 360, and about what you’d spend on a basic Windows computer. The PS3 includes a hard disk, a networking port, Wi-Fi wireless networking, and playback of DVDs and CDs. It produces high-definition video. In fact, the PS3 can also play a next-generation, high-definition movie disk, called Blu-ray.

The Wii is a small, thin white box that costs just $250 and has much wimpier specs than the Sony. It does have Wi-Fi, but it lacks a hard disk, a networking port, and the ability to play DVDs or CDs, let alone Blu-ray disks. It cannot produce high-definition video. It has fewer ports and connectors.

Yet, in our tests, we found the more modest Wii to be the more exciting, fun and satisfying of the two new game machines. We and our four volunteer testers were impressed by the rich, realistic graphics and intricate game play in some of the half-dozen PS3 games we tried. By contrast, we all agreed that the graphics on the Wii ranged from dated to cheesy.

But the Wii won our hearts for one reason: It uses a wireless controller that can detect your arm and hand motions and transfer them to the screen, so that you can physically control the action. This opens up huge possibilities. In sports games, you can actually swing a baseball bat or tennis racket or golf club. In adventure games, you can slash a sword through the air or throw a punch. You make pretty much the same motions, using your full arm and hand, that you’d make with the real objects.

With the Wii, you don’t sit on the couch and just press buttons. You typically stand. You get a workout. In fact the Wii controller, a slim rectangular gadget that looks like a TV remote control, has a wrist strap to prevent it from being hurled across the room while you are, say, serving in tennis. The controller also has a small built-in speaker and it transmits vibrations to make the play more realistic. There are already reports of people complaining of sore elbows and wrists from hours of Wii play. Our testers were initially amazed that they felt a little winded and sore after hours in front of the Wii.

To show off these capabilities, every Wii comes with a free disk called Wii Sports that includes simple, basic sports games — tennis, baseball, golf, bowling, and boxing. These aren’t fully realized games; they are more like demonstrations. The graphics are crude and the games lack multiple levels of difficulty. But they are terrific fun. One of our testers, a college athlete who is bored by standard videogames, said they gave her the first opportunity ever to feel successful at a videogame.

We assume some clever game developer can produce more sophisticated versions of these sports games, and of other types of games that make full use of the Wii controller. There are also likely to be specialized controllers that can take advantage of the Wii’s motion sensitivity.

The PS3’s controller, which resembles the one on the previous-generation PlayStation 2, also has some motion sensitivity. But it seems much more limited, and the controller doesn’t vibrate.

The two products are clearly aimed at different audiences. While the PS3 has a lot of multimedia features, it is really for hard-core gamers with deep pockets (or with parents with deep pockets) — the folks who spend days mastering all the levels and secrets of a complex game.

The Wii is for casual game players, including younger kids and older adults who find the complexity and finger skills required for the PlayStation and Xbox to be intimidating. Even adventure games and racing games on the Wii seem easier to get into than similar titles on the PS3.

Left: Two people seen standing while they use the Nintendo Wii’s motion-sensor remotes to play games. Right: Screen views of a Wii tennis match show on-screen players mimicking motions of the wireless controllers.

In addition to Wii Sports, we tested and enjoyed two other Wii titles — “The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess,” an adventure game; and “Excite Truck,” a driving game. In the former, the controller can be swung like a sword. In the latter, you can move it to steer. We also ran a simple slideshow on the Wii by inserting a memory card from a digital camera.

The Wii can also play a selection of older Nintendo games, such as Super Mario and Donkey Kong. You have to buy and download these from the online Wii shop. But we were disappointed that they require the purchase of an extra, old-style controller, which we couldn’t find in either of our local Best Buy or Circuit City stores.

The Wii also has a fun system for creating avatars you can use to represent yourself in various games. They are called “Miis” and you can assign them a wide range of facial features.

The PS3 has some impressive features. All six of us were blown away by the graphics on PS3 titles like “Genji: Days of the Blade,” an action-adventure game set in old Japan; and “Ridge Racer 7,” a car-racing game. We enjoyed the skateboarding game “Tony Hawk’s Project 8,” including the use of the PlayStation controller’s limited-motion sensitivity — though the graphics in that game were much cruder than in the other two.

We also were impressed by the photo slideshow feature on the PS3, which turned photos on a camera memory card we inserted into sharp, vibrant images of snapshot prints fluttering on the screen.

We also watched a high-definition movie on a Blu-ray disk and thought it looked and sounded good.

But none of us felt that the game graphics, or the Blu-ray movie playback, were superior enough to the Xbox 360’s graphics and DVD playback, to justify the PS3’s heftier price. None of our four volunteer testers said they’d buy the PS3 at $600. (The $500 model of the PS3 seemed a bad bargain because it lacks Wi-Fi, which is needed in most homes to connect to the Internet for online game playing.)

In fact, the PS3’s graphics, while better in some cases than what we’d seen on the Xbox, weren’t knock-your-socks-off better. And, to really get the most out of a PS3, especially its Blu-ray disk feature, you need a high-definition TV.

In addition, there were some annoying lapses on the PS3. Setup was long and complicated. Load times for games and for levels within games were slow. Typing is tedious, using an onscreen representation of a cellphone keypad (though you can attach a computer keyboard if you have one.) Just registering for the Internet features seemed to take an eternity.

Plus, the PS3’s wireless controller was a pain. In our tests, it often ran out of juice and had to be plugged in to be recharged. Once plugged in, we were always accidentally disconnecting it, because the cable was too short.

Speaking of cables, they may cost you a bundle on a PS3. It comes with a new-style high-definition connector, called an HDMI jack, that provides the best video on a high-definition TV. But it lacks an HDMI cable, an accessory that can easily cost $100.

For mainstream users, who lack the skill or patience or interest for complex videogames, the Wii is the way to go. For hard-core gamers, the PS3 will be the one you want, but only if you are willing to part with a lot of money.

Write to MossbergSolution@wsj.com