The report, “How Much Information? 2009 Report on American Consumers,” reveals that U.S. households consumed approximately 3.6 zettabytes of information in 2008. (The numbers also include television and radio transmissions.) That’s roughly the amount of information found in thick paperback novels stacked seven feet high over the entire U.S. — including Alaska — according to UCSD estimates. One zettabyte is one billion trillion bytes.

Among the other findings:

• The 3.6 zettabytes of total information used by Americans in their homes far exceeds storage or transmission capacity.
• The total is roughly 20 times more than what can be stored at one time on all the hard drives in the world.
• Less than 2 percent of the total information was transmitted over the Internet.
• Between 1980 and 2008, bytes consumed increased 350 percent, for an average annual growth rate of 5.4 percent.
• The average American’s information consumption tops 34 gigabytes a day.
• On average 41 percent of information time is watching TV (including DVDs, recorded TV and real-time watching).
• American consumers watched 36 million hours of television on mobile devices each month.
• Computer games are the biggest information source, totaling 18.5 gigabytes per day for the average American consumer, or about 67 percent of all bytes consumed.
• Americans spent 16 percent of their information hours using the Internet (second only to TV’s 41 percent).
• Americans consume about 1.8 hours of Internet video every month, or roughly 0.89 exabytes.
• Communications and web browsing result in 65.7 hours of usage per month, per user, and generate about 8.01 exabytes of data.

These data sets are based on an interesting interpretation of the meaning of data and information.

We distinguish between data and information. Information is a subset of data – but what is data? For our purposes, we define data as artificial signals intended to convey meaning. ‘Artificial,’ because data is created by machines, such as microphones, cameras, environmental sensors, barcode readers, or computer keyboards. Streams of data from sensors are extensively transformed by a series of machines, such as cable routers (location change), storage devices (time shift), and computers (symbol and meaning change). These transformations, in turn, create new data. Data is not information until it becomes available to potential consumers of that information.

So what is information?

Our measures of information include all data delivered directly to people at home, whether for personal consumption (such as entertainment), for communication (e.g., email) or for any other reason.

The caveats notwithstanding, one can easily argue for or against this study. I don’t care either way. One of the reasons I’m so intrigued by its findings is because I believe that the big growth in data (and information) consumption is not behind us, but ahead of us. Just imagine when there are billions of smart edge points: smartphones, e-readers or entirely new Internet content consumption devices. This is going to be the single biggest challenge — and opportunity — of the coming decades. It won’t be long before zettabyte becomes yet another word we learned on our way to a world that is drowning in data.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks

As a responsible Mac user, I usually feel immune from most Internet threats…except for one. Using my Mac exactly as Apple intends it to be used sometimes renders my Internet connection virtually unusable for up to a month, and costs money to fix.

Could this happen to you? It depends on whether your Internet provider has a bandwidth “metering” policy (or “cap”). These caps are one of the most controversial topics for Internet users in 2009, and can put a significant crimp in your Internet use. Recently, Congressman Eric Massa (D-NY), who represents the Rochester area, introduced the “Broadband Internet Fairness Act” (H.R. 2902) (PDF). Massa got involved soon after Time Warner Cable unsuccessfully used Rochester as a test market for metering. Under this bill, the FTC would have veto power over such caps and thus allow them only under certain agreed-upon scenarios.

In my hometown of Lawrence, Kansas, the standard level of cable Internet service has a limit of 3GB of bandwidth per month. Overage is charged $2 per GB. Downloading a single movie from the iTunes store will blow through an entire monthly limit, and even the cable company’s most expensive “premium” service only allows 50GB of bandwidth. In 2009, that’s not really much bandwidth at all.

Once you’ve hit your limit, you have to severely restrict usage until the next month, or face a large bill. Your Apple TV remains stale without its new content, your iMac stops downloading podcasts, and your iPod weeps because it’s sick of the same old music you had last month.

Apple is the leader in multimedia content creation; new Mac users are always pleasantly surprised by how easy it is to buy from the iTunes store, or create their own content. A common question we get in our local user group is “I’m not sure what I did wrong, but all of a sudden I have a substantial overage bill from my cable company.” Of course, the user did nothing wrong, other than subscribe to a few podcasts, and perhaps download a new Apple software update and buy some shows with iTunes! The Mac is also blessed with great online backup services like MobileMe, yet when our user group did a presentation on backup strategy, I had to warn novice users to be careful lest their backups end up costing them an arm and a leg in bandwidth overage fees!

While on the surface this appears to be an isolated issue with a few providers, it is not. Bandwidth metering is a growing threat to cable Internet users in many cities. The American Cable Association (ACA) has come out in support of bandwidth caps, and the former chair of the ACA, Patrick Knorr, who implemented bandwidth caps in Lawrence, stated in multiple interviews that flat-rate Internet pricing is an “unsustainable” business model.

Unfortunately, using the Internet normally with bandwidth metering is also unsustainable. When Mac owners are worried about downloading movies, doing backups or performing system updates, that hurts the Apple brand. Apple is continually innovating new ways to make the Mac OS the best Internet operating system, creating a whole ecosystem with iTunes, MobileMe and iLife. All of these great products rely on the ubiquity of the Internet. When Internet providers start making normal Internet use an expensive proposition, Mac users lose.

Apple should lead the way and come out against bandwidth caps. Given that many of the offerings on the iTunes store actually compete with cable TV, Apple should be vigilant that cable companies do not use bandwidth metering as a way to stifle alternative ways of viewing content. Additionally, Apple should add a bandwidth meter to the Airport routers; that way the bandwidth use of entire households can be tracked. If bandwidth caps are inevitable, Apple can arm the consumer with data to monitor their usage and dispute discrepancies with their ISP.

Apple could be an ally for consumers (even the “PC guy” in the commercials would be helped!), while at the same time standing up for its own brand and vision of consumer Internet use. If you disagree with the idea of bandwidth metering, make sure your voice is heard by giving customer feedback to your own Internet provider and writing your member of Congress. I had better end this article now…bytes and bits equal dollars and cents for me, unfortunately!

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Infrastructure Overview, Q2 2010
• Report: The Future of Data Center Storage

Sounds easy, right? Wrong. CSR data is notoriously complex. Putting together a report can mean pulling data from environmental health and safety departments, community and education programs, philanthropic giving records, supply chain partners and operations records. Historically, companies have pulled that data into Excel spreadsheets to create new data sets for CSR reports. But as stakeholders — and shareholders — show more interest in sustainability concerns, companies are beginning to eye more sophisticated software to help them manage and report that data. 

Traditionally, CSR reports were released on an annual basis, sometime after the end of the company’s fiscal year. Combined with year-end financials, such reports informed socially responsible investment groups and shareholder organizations about companies’ activities. “A lot of these groups that…need that real, deep level of data tend to review their companies on an annual basis,” says Suzanne Fallender, Intel’s corporate responsibility communications manager.

In today’s market, however, companies are recognizing a need to go beyond sustainability reporting with strategic management plans that take social and environmental issues into account. That means they need deeper — and more dynamic — visibility into their performance against specific metrics, says Scott Bolick, VP of sustainability solutions for SAP. “We want to get the data at a level where it’s manageable,” he says. SAP, which just released its own sustainability report two weeks ago, is working on new solutions that could help clients automate sustainability reporting using data from its existing software products, Bolick says; the company’s recent acquisition of Clear Standards was a step in that direction.

Intel, which released its first CSR report in 2001 and its most recent report last week, currently uses a variety of internally developed, customized databases and information systems to help measure and manage its environmental impacts. But now the company says its needs are outgrowing customized solutions that sit on top of other software programs. “We are actually starting to explore alternative software solutions,” Gary Niekerk, senior manager of Corporate Responsibility, wrote in an email. “While our internal systems have worked well, the growing complexity of data needs and our push for ever more transparency is requiring us to look for even better solutions.”

As companies choose these new solutions, they need to consider how that data gets used, Bolick says. While health and safety metrics may need to be monitored constantly, other data (such as employee turnover) might be more meaningful on an annual basis. As companies set annual sustainability goals, they may want accountability for meeting those targets tracked on a monthly or quarterly schedule. Bolick points to the example of air travel. SAP has made a public commitment to reducing its carbon emissions to 2000 levels by 2020. To see progress, Bolick says he needs monthly visibility into the flights taken and the carbon that represents.

That doesn’t mean companies are necessarily moving their reporting in a more granular direction, however. Neither SAP, Intel nor Microsoft say they’ve seen a demand for more frequent data. Fallender notes that a number of years ago, Intel tried reporting quarterly environmental health and safety information on its web site, but stakeholders didn’t end up using the information. Collecting, verifying and publishing the data was labor intensive, so the company went back to annual reporting. However, Fallender says Intel could revisit the issue going forward.

If companies move increasingly toward dynamic information about their environmental performance, they’ll need systems that can verify the numbers’ accuracy. “The concern is that part of what we do before we publicize anything is auditing,” says Microsoft Chief Environmental Strategist Rob Bernard. SAP’s Bolick agrees: “The market is going to hold you accountable,” he says. “That’s why people are now saying, Excel spreadsheets aren’t going to cut it for me anymore.”

This article also appeared on BusinessWeek.com.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Big Data, ARM and Legal Troubles Transformed Infrastructure in Q4
• The Future of Work Platforms: An Overview
• A 2011 Green IT Forecast

As Stacey has pointed out over at GigaOM, there’s a lot of potential for synergy between IBM and Sun’s cloud computing offerings, and the combined company would likely offer a robust enough array to help enterprise customers migrate to the cloud. That could be good news for Sun’s Eco Responsibility initiative, launched in December 2005. At the outset, the campaign was part of an effort to bolster sales of Sun’s new energy-efficient chips and server products with a “green” message, but Sun also made an effort to tie the campaign into its overall approach to computing. Because cloud computing and green IT have become so closely linked in many minds, an acquisition of Sun by IBM likely wouldn’t put a damper on Sun’s Eco Responsibility initiatives (though I’d be surprised to see IBM keep the “Eco Responsibility” branding).

By acquiring Sun, IBM would also gain control of Java, Sun’s biggest brand success, if not its largest commercial one. (Sun may have swapped its SUNW stock ticker for JAVA in 2007, but in 2008, the company earned just $200 million from Java on total revenues of $13.8 billion.) AMR Research suggests that Java, not Sun’s server and storage products, could be the biggest boon for IBM — including for IBM’s recently launched “Smarter Planet” campaign, which aims to use information technology for improving the efficiency and sustainability of diverse industries, from food and oil to water and electricity. Because Java, a pervasive and powerful development platform, is already an important part of many of IBM’s software and services offerings, bringing it in-house could give IBM a serious advantage over other enterprise software vendors — including those (like SAP) seeking to make their own sustainability management software plays.

Earlier this year, I spoke at length with Drew Clark, director of strategy for the IBM Venture Capital Group, about IBM’s Smarter Planet initiative. He stressed the growing importance of the mobile handset; according to Clark, mobile access to the data generated from smart systems will play a key role in improving the effectiveness of such initiatives, particularly in the consumer space. In order to bring smarter tools to consumers — whether they be smart home energy management systems, smarter irrigation systems, or smart parking and traffic tools — Clark said making information accessible and actionable on a mobile device will be necessary. “The new IT platform has evolved from the desktop to the mobile handset,” he said.

For Clark, the mobile platform that can run such systems has to be three things: easy to use, easy to develop for (preferably with a developer community behind it), and “as open as you can be,” he said. “That’s the magic formula.”  By acquiring Java, Sun would add just such a platform to its portfolio of tools. (Sun’s Java ME is supported on Symbian, Windows Mobile and BlackBerry handsets — as well as unofficially on Android.)

However, that’s just my take. Unsurprisingly, neither Sun nor IBM would comment on the potential impact of such a deal on their green initiatives.

This article also appeared on BusinessWeek.com.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Infrastructure Overview, Q2 2010
• Report: The Future of Data Center Storage

Charles Moore wrote a great article about the unibody 13″ MacBook compared to the much-loved 12″ PowerBook. A friend of Charles argued that until the dimensions were nearly identical it could never be considered a replacement. Charles feels there’s a little more to it than that.

I think they’re both right (yes, life is good sitting on top of this fence).

I don’t disagree with Charles’ friend that width is a big factor, and here the new MacBook is much bigger than the 12.” However, I would suggest that depth is the more critical (for use on a table, airline tray table, etc.) and here the new model is only slightly bigger. Further, weight is a big factor and the two are pretty much identical.

So you need to consider just what you’re getting for those extra couple inches of width. It’s more than just a much bigger screen (in resolution, not just size). The larger case allows a larger thermal envelope so they can pack all that power in there. Remember that Apple could never get a G5 in a notebook no matter what. The G4 in the 12″ initially ran at 867MHz, less than the 17″ introduced the same day.

I’m just not convinced one must insist that every dimension be equal or smaller to be a true replacement. Given the near-equality of each dimension except width, and what you’re getting for that width — and its value — I’d say the 13″ kicks some serious butt. And I put my money where my text is, since I own one and love it.

What Apple Could Do

Can Apple do better? One thing to consider is that, while I believe 1280 x 800 a minimum reasonable screen resolution, does that have to mean a 13″ screen? No, it doesn’t. Apple could drop to a 12″ screen (maybe even 11) and still support 1280 x 800. Look at how beautiful 1920 x 1200 looks on the MBP’s 17″ screen to convince yourself.

The smaller screen could address the complaint about width. However, this is where fantasy ends and reality begins.

Cost

The 13″ screen size is ubiquitous. In short, they’re rolling off the assembly lines even as we “speak,” and have come down in price to make those models more affordable. Gearing up for a”non-standard” 12- or 11-inch might actually cost more. The smaller 10″ displays are certainly becoming common, but I’m not sure they could support 1280 x 800 well enough.

Power

OK, you’ve managed to shave a couple of inches off the width. That’s great, right? Well, maybe not for the electronics inside, who suddenly begin to wonder why it’s so hot in here. (Yes, I know I shouldn’t anthropomorphize electronics. They hate that.) Anyway, would the smaller model support the 2.4GHz like the current high-end MB does? Likely not. Would it install the “full” NVIDIA graphics, or would it have to be slowed down like in the MacBook Air?

Other

Do I think Apple could pull the CD drive from this new model? Personally, yes. Sell an external one as an option and use the “air sharing” software. I’m surprised at how little I actually use the CD in my MacBook. Still, many people want an all-in-one to be, you know, all-in-one, and there’s a lot to be said for that.

So then here’s the issue. Let’s say Apple uses an 11″ screen, and even removes the CD drive. Now the machine is small and light. And let’s say they use the 17″ battery technology to cram as much as they can into the thing. Even with a resolution of 1280 x 800, how powerful can this machine be? It would probably have to be even lower power than the MacBook Air. In short, not a primary laptop. That’s fine, you say? Yeah, except we’re talking about a 12″ PowerBook replacement, remember? The 12″ was perfectly capable of being a primary machine, so any machine dubbed as it’s replacement should be, too. A “netbook” will not be a 12″ replacement.

What’s That Leave Us With?

So what can Apple do? Well, to keep it affordable, stick with the common and relatively inexpensive 13″ display. Better keep the CD as well. Try to make it as slim and light as possible given those constraints, then pack as much power as can reasonably be kept cool in that footprint (preferably reaching “pro” levels).

In the end you’ll have something that balances all the factors in creating something simultaneously small, powerful, and affordable. And when Apple tosses all that in the margarita blender, what do they pour out? Well, well, it’s the unibody 13″ MacBook!

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks

The outages will affect Iridium’s roughly 300,000 subscribers around the globe (except near the poles) as the hole where the satellite was passes over the earth. Farrar also notes that while Iridium may have to be nimble to navigate around the debris caused by the destruction of the two satellites, most other commercial service providers are in different orbits and should be relatively unaffected. In a worst case scenario, Iridium may have to raise the orbit of its entire constellation by 10 km to avoid debris, but Farrar says that won’t necessarily disrupt service.

Some other commercial companies have orbits relatively close – the closest is Orbcomm (only about 10km away), then the optical imaging sats are a bit lower. It wouldn’t get up to Globalstar’s orbit (600km up) or of course the geostationary belt (36000km above the earth). There are also a bunch of government (military and civil) satellites in and around these orbits (weather and other Earth observation satellites for example).

As for the loss of a machine that can cost millions to build and launch, Farrar is sanguine, pointing out that it was an old satellite and that Iridium has plenty of spares to continue its operations. He also notes that Iridium is in the process of contracting for its next generation of satellites.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The Internet of Things: What It Is, Why It Matters
• Growing Mobile Data Use Turned Up Heat on Carriers in Q3
• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era

On Monday, eMeter announced that Texas utility CenterPoint will use its meter-data-management system for a rollout of 2 million smart meters starting in March and finishing up in 2013. The system, called EnergyIP, will help CenterPoint’s Houston-area customers monitor and manage their electricity use and cost, as well as provide outage, restoration and connection and disconnection services for the company. While he didn’t say how much eMeter will earn from the contract, Chris King, chief strategy officer for the San Mateo, Calif.-based company, said that the IT system will make up less than 5 percent, or $32 million, of the cost of the $640 million program.

eMeter’s software essentially helps the utility’s older systems, like billing, work together with the new smart-grid systems, King says. The network includes automated controls for different appliances, and it will keep track of the appliances and report power outages. The software — and the smart meters it works with — enable peak-pricing and time-of-use programs, in which utilities charge more for electricity used during times of high demand, as well as demand-response programs, in which utilities ask a group of customers to reduce their usage during critical periods to avoid outages, in exchange for lower electricity bills.

In pilot programs, customers have been able to reduce as much as 40 percent of their household electricity use during critical peaks, King says. eMeter, which raised $12.5 million in April, claims its software works with all different smart meters, making it ideal for utilities that are still trying to decide which meters to use. The company licenses its software to utilities and helps them install it into their data center and integrate it with their existing software.

eMeter says it has signed a dozen contracts with utilities in the last few months, representing a total of 23 million smart meters, and has dozens more contracts in the works. About 5 million meters already are connected, with the remaining 18 million set to be installed within three years, King says.

That’s a significant number considering that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in December reported that 4.7 percent — about 6.8 million — of the 144.4 million meters installed in the United States are “advanced meters,” up from less than 1 percent in 2006. But with President Barack Obama calling for the installation of 40 million smart meters, King expects the growth to accelerate.

The stimulus bill the U.S. House of Representatives passed last week, as well as the version that the Senate plans to consider this week, both call for $4.5 billion for transmission funding that could boost smart meters and other smart-grid technologies. It already seems to be helping the late-blooming sector grow. “We’ve already spoken to a half-dozen utilities about using the stimulus funds to get going quickly, and they’re all very excited about it,” says King.

Other energy-management companies also have noted the increased momentum. “Believe it or not, most of what we’re hearing from potential partners is that energy efficiency is one of the areas investors are still excited about,” Matthew Smith, vice president of marketing for Greenbox Technology, which is raising its first round of funding for its software to manage home energy use, told us recently. “Finding ways for people to save money in a down economy is a good thing.”

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The Smart Energy Home
• Green IT Wrap-up: Q1 2009

Video viewing devices used by U.S. Internet users. Chart courtesy of Cisco.

These results should be music to the ears of Hulu’s management, but the survey also shows that content owners have to play catchup when it comes to licensing their catalogs for overseas audiences. Germans spend twice as much time on their PCs and laptops viewing user-generated videos as opposed to professional content, most likely because there just is no Hulu.de yet. However, Cisco and other devices makers still have some work left to do, as well:  Many Internet users around the world don’t seem to be too excited about the prospect of online video on their TVs.

The Cisco study is based on a survey conducted by the Center for the Digital Future at the USC’s Annenberg School for Communication, which surveyed about 1,000 users in each of the four countries. The study isn’t too specific when it comes to the distinction between user-generated and professional content, but a Cisco spokesperson told us that “professional” encompasses studio-produced shows and movies, as distinct from consumer-produced videos.

This is the first time Annenberg and Cisco have done this survey, but it’s probably safe to assume that user-generated content would have been far more prominent in the years before Hulu. Also, professional content may be taking up more of the users’ time may simply because TV shows and movies tend to be much longer than your average YouTube video.

The study also covers the devices used to watch video and television programming, which again showed significant differences between the U.S. and the rest of the world. 42 percent of U.S. respondents own a DVR, whereas only 11 percent of all Germans surveyed time-shift TV watching in their living room.

The U.S. is also a front-runner when it comes to mobile video. About 23 percent declared that they watch video on their mobile phones, while only 8-12 percent do so in Sweden, China and Germany. Watching videos on iPods and other non-phone devices is also most popular in the U.S., but at 8 percent, far less prominent than one might think.

So, overall, where is online video most popular? No, it’s not the U.S., despite Hulu. It’s China. Chinese Internet users spend almost two hours per day watching video on their PCs, compared with 1.8 hours per day in front of their TVs.  U.S. (and German) users watch 1.5 hours of online video per day — far less than the 3.8 hours of traditional TV time U.S. respondents enjoy daily. This makes Chinese Internet users the only ones that actually watch more video on their PCs that on the TV — and they don’t seem to be bothered about this at all.

“When asked if they would be interested in watching video found on the Internet on their television set, most seemed apathetic, or perhaps they did not understand the question,”‘ the report notes somewhat condescendingly. Perhaps they just didn’t understand why anyone would ask them such a silly question.

Americans, on the other hand, love their big, flat-screen TVs. However, the interest in getting online content on that screen seemed somewhat muted, even stateside. The majority of users where up for the idea, the report notes without providing specific details, but “relatively large numbers (…) neither agreed or disagreed, suggesting that maybe they are unaware of the possibility.” I guess all those companies presenting new, Internet-enabled set-top-boxes at CES these days still have some convincing to do.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• A 2011 Connected Consumer Forecast
• Connected Consumer Q4: New Platforms and OTT’s Dynamic Duo Dominated
• Connected Consumer Market Overview, Q2 2010

Because netbooks are designed for ultraportability, they strive for both lower battery weight and longer battery life.  Often, lower power consumption has meant reduced performance — a big no-no for traditional laptop marketing. But for netbooks, which strip down the computer’s power needs with lightweight operating systems and software, performance trade-offs aren’t a significant problem. By including energy-efficient components, such as highly efficient processors and solid state drives, netbooks can make the most of smaller-sized batteries.

The vast majority of netbooks are powered by Intel’s Atom processor, an energy-efficient chip inside of the laptops listed with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Energy Star program. How efficient is it? Atom sports a maximum thermal design point (TDP) of 2.5 watts; compare that with Intel’s Core 2 Duo chips, which have a TDP of 65 watts 25 watts. That not only makes the notebooks more efficient, it makes the machines using them cooler and quieter, a key feature for a netbook. Netbooks’ efficiency is likely to increase in the year ahead. More power-conscious ARM-based netbooks are coming in 2009 with chips that will use no more than 1 watt of power.

Energy efficiency can have other benefits as well. The reduced weight from a small battery can help shrink the carbon footprint involved in shipping them to stores and buyers. It also can help manufacturers meet environmental standards such as the U.S.-based EPEAT program, which certifies products that achieve a number of environmental performance metrics, from energy efficiency to end-of-life management. Lenovo’s ThinkPad SL400 and SL500 netbooks and ASUS’s N-series are EPEAT Gold, while the HP Mini-note line is EPEAT Silver.

EPEAT also evaluates the ingredients that make up a computers’ components. In the EU, electronic devices must comply with the Eurpean Restriction on Hazardous Substances (RoHS) directive, which limits the use of heavy metals and other toxic compounds in electrionics. Some manufacturers, including Lenovo and Fujitsu, offer RoHS-compliant netbooks to the U.S. market. Many new, full-featured laptops are moving in this direction as well, but because the entire netbooks category is new, they’ve got the jump on eco-label compliance.

But perhaps netbooks’ greenest feature is their whole approach to personal computing. They don’t offer monster performance, but most of us don’t need monster performance. Netbooks are good enough for most of what I want to do most of the time, among them email, web browsing (including blogging), music, and some occasional online video. I suspect the same is true for many consumers, and because of their low price, they’re likely to become the computer of choice for consumers looking for nothing more than light-duty Internet machines.

This “take only what you need” approach is a fundamentally greener way of looking at resource use, whether the industry we’re talking about is forestry or computing. Just be sure to power down your home computer when you’re on the go, or the eco-boost from your efficient little netbook just might go up in a plume of coal-powered smoke.

This article also appeared on BusinessWeek.com

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Report: The Future of Netbooks!
• The State of the Smartbook
• Report: 3-D Computing From Digital Cinema to GPUs

So whatever happened to all those P2P set-top boxes that were supposed to revolutionize not only how we watch video, but also how those bits reach our living room? With the year coming to a close, we decided to check back, report about progress (and failures) and give an outlook for the fate of these boxes in 2009.

Here are five P2P set top boxes that made headlines in 2008:

Myka was the big P2P-device story of the spring. It promised licensed content from major studios as well as BitTorrent in a nice box that looked a little like an over-sized Apple TV, and it got enthusiastic coverage from Wired.com, Gizmodo, Engadget and others. It’s web site however hasn’t been updated since spring and is still taking pre-orders for a supposed release in the summer of ’08. Its forum has been taken over by spammers, and one former affiliate partner complained to us that he hasn’t seen any money nor heard from the company since April. We tried to get in touch with Myka, but didn’t receive any reply — enough reasons to call this vaporware.

Vudu is definitely not vaporware, but the company has faced its own set of obstacles this year. Vudu offers its customers progressive, P2P-powered downloads of 1,100 HD movies for $4 a pop. It’s been struggling to get a bigger audience for its box despite price cuts, and it went through a round of layoffs and the departure of its CEO. On the plus side, it did just introduce a new high-end device. TheVudu XL 2 features “aerospace-grade aluminum bezel,” is available only through home-theater installers and comes with a hefty price tag of $1,299. That seems to be just the right business model for a recession…

China-based Vatata promises to bring its own streaming P2P video platform Vakaka as well as popular file-sharing protocols like BitTorrent to the living room. The company doesn’t actually produce it’s own set top boxes, but it licenses its platform to hardware makers. We covered the company earlier this year when it had just struck three such licensing agreements.Vatata’s CEO Jian Song told us that these devices have now reached the shelves of retailers in China, but customers have only bought around 10,000 of them so far. The company is looking for a partner in the U.S. right now and is actively working on the next generation of its platform, which will also feature Hulu playback, according to Song. This one could get interesting — if it ever actually makes its way to U.S. retailers.

Boxee also doesn’t have its own box, but instead runs amongst other things on Apple TVs, offering Apple users not only the chance to download torrents straight to their living room thanks to a built-in BitTorrent client, but also to use other people’s guilty torrent pleasures as a recommendation engine for Hulu streams and other legitimate content sources. That’s pretty clever, but the whole setup has one downside: Apple tightly controls its own platform, as evident by the latest Apple TV update that broke Boxee. Granted, the Boxee community came up with a fix in no time, but Boxee will remain a niche product if it depends on its users capability to jailbreak their set-top box after every new update.

NextshareTV is a set-top box developed by Pioneer and P2P Next, a European research project backed by a couple million Euros of EU funding that aims to figure out better P2P streaming solutions. Pioneer has apparently produced a working prototype of this box for an extensive field test of the technology. Don’t expect these boxes to reach the shelves in 2009 though: The P2P Next project is scheduled to run for four years, and it’s unlikely that content partners like the BBC will allow anything to reach the marketplace before issues like rights management and territorial restrictions are solved.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Report: Delivering Content in the Cloud
• Cisco Acquires Pure Digital
• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era