In the lead up to the 2010 Open Source CMS Market Share Report, water&stone surveyed a group of users of open source content management systems.
research
Mobile broadband laptop and netbook users to consume 1.3 exabytes of video per month worldwide by 2017
Newly released forecasts by technology and media specialist Coda Research Consultancy show that portable laptop and netbook users will access 1.3 exabytes of video content per month by 2017 - a sixty fold increase over 2009.
This figure will account for nearly three quarters of all global traffic via mobile broadband portables. The top region for video consumption will be Asia Pacific, which will account for just over half (53%) of all video traffic globally. To contrast, Europe will account for 26% of all global video traffic, and North America 14%.
The prominence of Asia Pacific represents its overall broadband traffic consumption via portables. Just under half (46%) of all global traffic via portables will be consumed in Asia Pacific, due in part to mobile broadband being the sole vehicle for many people to access broadband in developing countries. To compare, Europe will account for 26% of all global traffic, North America for 15%, Middle East and Africa for 5%, and Central and South America for 8%.
Working Knowledge: Microsoft vs. Open Source
I forgot who sent the tweet on Twitter but I was pointed to some very interesting research (2005) posted at the Harvard Business School's Working Knowledge site.
Microsoft vs. Open Source: Who Will Win?
Using formal economic modelling, professors Pankaj Ghemawat and Ramon Casadesus-Masanell consider the competitive dynamics of the software wars between Microsoft and open source.
Financial Times: The irony of a web without science
I found this article via Creative Commons' Science Commons. In the Financial Times article, "The irony of a web without science", James Boyle writes:
I ask these questions because I've seen first hand how challenging it really is for researchers and scientists to openly collaborate on their work. We think of the research community and the education system as very open, but I have witnessed too many times the presence of pride and protection of "product" to know otherwise. I can't help but wonder, what will be the trigger in order for science community to go through the paradigm shift that it so desperately needs?
The greatest irony, though, is this. The world wide web was designed in a scientific laboratory to facilitate access to scientific knowledge. In every other area of life - commerce, social networking, pornography - it has been a smashing success. But in the world of science itself? With the virtues of an open web all around us, we have proceeded to build an endless set of walled gardens, something that looks a lot like Compuserv or Minitel and very little like a world wide web for science.Having the strong science background that I do with ten years spent as a forecast meteorologist, I can't help but ponder on the article James Boyle has written. How much research wasn't pursued further due to the fact that it never left the pages of the scientific journals and read by the masses? Why does the research community have a difficult time publishing their work on the Web? As long as a proper process for peer review is established for Internet publications, which it can with the proper content/collaboration management system, are scientific journals still a necessity?
I ask these questions because I've seen first hand how challenging it really is for researchers and scientists to openly collaborate on their work. We think of the research community and the education system as very open, but I have witnessed too many times the presence of pride and protection of "product" to know otherwise. I can't help but wonder, what will be the trigger in order for science community to go through the paradigm shift that it so desperately needs?
