Really? That's good to know. Mind you, I don't think I've purchased any sort of media/digital device in the last 5 years that didn't offer Component or S-Video connections.
NTSC vs. PAL issues still occur with S-video connections. The chroma signal on S-video is already fully encoded to NTSC or PAL standards on the appropriate 3.58 or 4.43MHz sub-carrier, exactly the same as for composite video; it's just that it's carried separately from the luminance & synchronization signals. So sets which won't accept PAL on the composite input won't normally accept it on S-video either.
Going down to component level bypasses the NTSC vs. PAL issues, just leaving the slightly different scanning rates with which to contend (50 vs. 60 Hz vertical, 15.625 vs. 15.734 kHz horizontal).
Offtopic but it does pain me to see so many people get a nice widescreen digital HD capable television and not only connect their freeview/cable box to the television via the old RF/Coax connection, but also have everything permanently stretched across the screen regardless of whether it's widescreen or not!
Oh, I know the feeling! Some people seem to think that they have a wide screen so they must always fill it, even when the program material is 4:3.
I find it sad that in the early days of television engineers put huge amounts of effort into designs to insure the best scanning linearity and overall picture geometry possible, and now sets are provided with options to distort deliberately a 4:3 picture to fit the 16:9 frame. I can't understand why so many people seem willing to watch such a grossly distorted picture.
The broadcasters are complicit too, with their "compromise" settings in which they expand 4:3 material so that when displayed on a widescreen set the black bars down the sides are smaller. The only problem is that to maintain the proper aspect ratio the top and bottom of the original picture is then cut off. That's fine if the original 4:3 recording was made with such a matte in mind, but archived material shown as such suffers badly.