【简介】感谢网友“雕龙文库”参与投稿，这里小编给大家分享一些，方便大家学习。
Wheres Britains Bill Gates?
英国的比尔?盖茨在哪?
MEET the British Bill Gates. He studied computer science at Cambridgedropping out to starthis career in nearby Silicon Fen. Then he launched his own start-up, based at SiliconRoundabout, a new hub of tech firms in east London. Bolstered by finance from the City, heresisted the lure of a foreign takeover, ultimately listing on the London Stock Exchange.
让我们一起来与认识英国的比尔?盖茨。他原本在剑桥大学主修计算机科学专业辍学来到学习附近的硅谷开始自己创业。然后他在英国东部的迷你硅谷成立了一家新的科技公司。由于有来自城市的财政支持，他拒绝了外国公司收购的诱惑，最终使自己的公司在伦敦证券交易所上市。
It is a plausible biographygiven the necessary addition of animal spiritsbut an imaginaryone. Britain has no digital equivalent of the 18th-century industrial innovators who turnedtechnology into commercial leadership. Its more recent prowess in pharmaceuticals andbiotechnology has not been emulated in the digital sphere. David Camerons government shouldponder this failure and address the reasons for it. Luck is one of them, but so are nationaland European regulations and a tepid climate for entrepreneurs.
虽然只是想象的，但如果加入了必要的奋斗精神，这样的自传是看似合理的。在信息时代，没有等同于18世纪工业革命的可以把英国带上世界商业霸主的地位发明。在制药和生物科技上的高超技术是数码领域所无法模仿的。大卫?卡梅隆政府应该反思这次失败并且找出其原因。运气就是其中之一，英国本土和欧洲的管制以及对企业家冷淡的态度也是原因的一部分。
A nation of digital shopkeepers
作为数位公司的店主的国家
Britain has one of the biggest online economies. Its researchers invented both the web and the computer. It has the English languagewhich helps to link it with Californias Silicon Valley and Indian high-techand great universities. There are thriving tech clusters in Bristol, London and elsewhere . More so than other European countries, Britain should be competing with America as a tech leader.
英国有最大的网络经济。他的研究人员发明的既有网络也有电脑。英国拥有语言优势这个帮助他们和加州的硅谷以及印度高科技区域建立联系，以及拥有好的大学。在布里斯托尔,伦敦一起英国的其他地区,许多科技公司的发展蒸蒸日上。比起其他欧洲国家，英国应该以技术行业领跑者的身份来与美国竞争。
Yet it has nurtured relatively few big tech companies and no huge ones. In particular, Britain has vanishingly few platform firmsie, the sort that, like Microsoft, Google or Facebook, have built and marketed a service or piece of software on which other businesses and applications rely. That is where the real money is: platforms tend to yield lots of jobs in spin-offs and ancillary enterprises. Britain has Autonomy, which makes specialised search software, and ARM, which designs the microchips for Apples iPhones. Both are leaders in their fields, but neither is a giant. More damningly, they are the only two innovative tech outfits in the FTSE index of leading shares.
虽然英国有一些较大的科技公司，但是没有一个大型的科技公司。特别是，英国几乎没有应用平台类的公司比如，像微软，谷歌或脸谱公司这样的公司，他们已经开发了一些其它商业或者应用程序依赖的服务和软件。这就是公司利益的来源:应用平台公司经常通过其工司资产分配和其附属公司带来大量的工作岗位。英国有专注于搜索软件的公司奥托诺尼和为苹果手机生产微型芯片的安谋公司。两家公司都是其行业的领头人，但是都不是一个行业巨头。更加致命的是，他们是在伦敦金融时报指数主要证券中仅有的两家创新型科技股。
There should surely be more. Individual ideas and people are the key, obviously, but there are three problems with Britains tech ecology that its government could ameliorate. One is the absence of a market as big and homogeneous as American tech firms enjoy. Another is a relative shortage of capital for start-ups and growing firms. The third is the lack of entrepreneurs who combine technological expertise, business acumen and the sort of balls that, in 2006, reputedly let Mark Zuckerberg turn down Yahoo!s offer of $1 billion for Facebook.
这里的确需要有更多这样的公司。显然，个人的创意和消费群体是关键，但是，对于英国科技发展的环境，仍有三个需要政府解决的问题。其中一个是缺少一个像美国公司拥有的那种大型市场。另一个问题就是新创立以及处于发展期的公司相对缺少资金。第三点就是缺少能够将专业技术，商业头脑以及超人胆识相结合的企业家，值得一提的，脸书的创始人，扎克伯格，就拥有这样的胆识并拒绝了雅虎10亿美元的收购报价。
Begin with the market. You might think that distance and geography would be marginal considerations for tech firms. You would be wrong. For American firms, a domestic market of 300m interconnected English-speaking consumers is a big advantage. Easy transatlantic communications should help British firms conquer that market; but they also encourage American firms to snap up promising British companies. Europe is fragmented not only by multiple languages but also by the lack of a properly common market in services, including digital ones, so tech firms must still overcome assorted legal and bureaucratic barriers to trade across the EU. Digital firms should be able to benefit from the single market just as mobile-phone companies such as Nokia and Vodafone have. Proper implementation across the union of the directive on liberalising the services market, passed in 2006, would be a start.
从一个市场形成伊始。你可能会认为距离和地理位置对于高科技公司来说是一个不重要的考虑因素。不过，这样想你会错的。对于美国公司来说，国内的3亿把英语作为交流语言的消费者形成的市场就是一个巨大优势。简单的横渡大西洋交流便能帮助英国公司征服美国市场;但是美国会鼓励他们的公司竞购这些有潜力的英国公司。欧洲不仅由于多种语言而不能形成统一的市场，同时也由于缺少一个合适地常规服务市场，其中包括数位服务，因此高科技公司必须一致克服各种各样的法律和政治上的障碍来与欧盟贸易。数位企业应该能像手机公司诺基亚和沃达丰一样从单一的市场获利。对2006年通过的旨在将欧盟范围内服务市场自由化建议的正确贯彻与执行,将是一个开始.
Wheres Britains Bill Gates?
英国的比尔?盖茨在哪?
MEET the British Bill Gates. He studied computer science at Cambridgedropping out to starthis career in nearby Silicon Fen. Then he launched his own start-up, based at SiliconRoundabout, a new hub of tech firms in east London. Bolstered by finance from the City, heresisted the lure of a foreign takeover, ultimately listing on the London Stock Exchange.
让我们一起来与认识英国的比尔?盖茨。他原本在剑桥大学主修计算机科学专业辍学来到学习附近的硅谷开始自己创业。然后他在英国东部的迷你硅谷成立了一家新的科技公司。由于有来自城市的财政支持，他拒绝了外国公司收购的诱惑，最终使自己的公司在伦敦证券交易所上市。
It is a plausible biographygiven the necessary addition of animal spiritsbut an imaginaryone. Britain has no digital equivalent of the 18th-century industrial innovators who turnedtechnology into commercial leadership. Its more recent prowess in pharmaceuticals andbiotechnology has not been emulated in the digital sphere. David Camerons government shouldponder this failure and address the reasons for it. Luck is one of them, but so are nationaland European regulations and a tepid climate for entrepreneurs.
虽然只是想象的，但如果加入了必要的奋斗精神，这样的自传是看似合理的。在信息时代，没有等同于18世纪工业革命的可以把英国带上世界商业霸主的地位发明。在制药和生物科技上的高超技术是数码领域所无法模仿的。大卫?卡梅隆政府应该反思这次失败并且找出其原因。运气就是其中之一，英国本土和欧洲的管制以及对企业家冷淡的态度也是原因的一部分。
A nation of digital shopkeepers
作为数位公司的店主的国家
Britain has one of the biggest online economies. Its researchers invented both the web and the computer. It has the English languagewhich helps to link it with Californias Silicon Valley and Indian high-techand great universities. There are thriving tech clusters in Bristol, London and elsewhere . More so than other European countries, Britain should be competing with America as a tech leader.
英国有最大的网络经济。他的研究人员发明的既有网络也有电脑。英国拥有语言优势这个帮助他们和加州的硅谷以及印度高科技区域建立联系，以及拥有好的大学。在布里斯托尔,伦敦一起英国的其他地区,许多科技公司的发展蒸蒸日上。比起其他欧洲国家，英国应该以技术行业领跑者的身份来与美国竞争。
Yet it has nurtured relatively few big tech companies and no huge ones. In particular, Britain has vanishingly few platform firmsie, the sort that, like Microsoft, Google or Facebook, have built and marketed a service or piece of software on which other businesses and applications rely. That is where the real money is: platforms tend to yield lots of jobs in spin-offs and ancillary enterprises. Britain has Autonomy, which makes specialised search software, and ARM, which designs the microchips for Apples iPhones. Both are leaders in their fields, but neither is a giant. More damningly, they are the only two innovative tech outfits in the FTSE index of leading shares.
虽然英国有一些较大的科技公司，但是没有一个大型的科技公司。特别是，英国几乎没有应用平台类的公司比如，像微软，谷歌或脸谱公司这样的公司，他们已经开发了一些其它商业或者应用程序依赖的服务和软件。这就是公司利益的来源:应用平台公司经常通过其工司资产分配和其附属公司带来大量的工作岗位。英国有专注于搜索软件的公司奥托诺尼和为苹果手机生产微型芯片的安谋公司。两家公司都是其行业的领头人，但是都不是一个行业巨头。更加致命的是，他们是在伦敦金融时报指数主要证券中仅有的两家创新型科技股。
There should surely be more. Individual ideas and people are the key, obviously, but there are three problems with Britains tech ecology that its government could ameliorate. One is the absence of a market as big and homogeneous as American tech firms enjoy. Another is a relative shortage of capital for start-ups and growing firms. The third is the lack of entrepreneurs who combine technological expertise, business acumen and the sort of balls that, in 2006, reputedly let Mark Zuckerberg turn down Yahoo!s offer of $1 billion for Facebook.
这里的确需要有更多这样的公司。显然，个人的创意和消费群体是关键，但是，对于英国科技发展的环境，仍有三个需要政府解决的问题。其中一个是缺少一个像美国公司拥有的那种大型市场。另一个问题就是新创立以及处于发展期的公司相对缺少资金。第三点就是缺少能够将专业技术，商业头脑以及超人胆识相结合的企业家，值得一提的，脸书的创始人，扎克伯格，就拥有这样的胆识并拒绝了雅虎10亿美元的收购报价。
Begin with the market. You might think that distance and geography would be marginal considerations for tech firms. You would be wrong. For American firms, a domestic market of 300m interconnected English-speaking consumers is a big advantage. Easy transatlantic communications should help British firms conquer that market; but they also encourage American firms to snap up promising British companies. Europe is fragmented not only by multiple languages but also by the lack of a properly common market in services, including digital ones, so tech firms must still overcome assorted legal and bureaucratic barriers to trade across the EU. Digital firms should be able to benefit from the single market just as mobile-phone companies such as Nokia and Vodafone have. Proper implementation across the union of the directive on liberalising the services market, passed in 2006, would be a start.
从一个市场形成伊始。你可能会认为距离和地理位置对于高科技公司来说是一个不重要的考虑因素。不过，这样想你会错的。对于美国公司来说，国内的3亿把英语作为交流语言的消费者形成的市场就是一个巨大优势。简单的横渡大西洋交流便能帮助英国公司征服美国市场;但是美国会鼓励他们的公司竞购这些有潜力的英国公司。欧洲不仅由于多种语言而不能形成统一的市场，同时也由于缺少一个合适地常规服务市场，其中包括数位服务，因此高科技公司必须一致克服各种各样的法律和政治上的障碍来与欧盟贸易。数位企业应该能像手机公司诺基亚和沃达丰一样从单一的市场获利。对2006年通过的旨在将欧盟范围内服务市场自由化建议的正确贯彻与执行,将是一个开始.
