Wheres Britains Bill Gates?

　　英國的比爾?蓋茨在哪?

　　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.

　　讓我們一起來與認識英國的比爾?蓋茨。他原本在劍橋大學主修計算機科學專業輟學來到學習附近的硅谷開始自己創業。然后他在英國東部的迷你硅谷成立了一家新的科技公司。由于有來自城市的財政支持，他拒絕了外國公司收購的誘惑，最終使自己的公司在倫敦證券交易所上市。

　　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.

　　雖然只是想象的，但如果加入了必要的奮斗精神，這樣的自傳是看似合理的。在信息時代，沒有等同于18世紀工業革命的可以把英國帶上世界商業霸主的地位發明。在制藥和生物科技上的高超技術是數碼領域所無法模仿的。大衛?卡梅隆政府應該反思這次失敗并且找出其原因。運氣就是其中之一，英國本土和歐洲的管制以及對企業家冷淡的態度也是原因的一部分。

　　A nation of digital shopkeepers

　　作為數位公司的店主的國家

　　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.

　　英國有最大的網絡經濟。他的研究人員發明的既有網絡也有電腦。英國擁有語言優勢這個幫助他們和加州的硅谷以及印度高科技區域建立聯系，以及擁有好的大學。在布里斯托爾,倫敦一起英國的其他地區,許多科技公司的發展蒸蒸日上。比起其他歐洲國家，英國應該以技術行業領跑者的身份來與美國競爭。

　　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.

　　雖然英國有一些較大的科技公司，但是沒有一個大型的科技公司。特別是，英國幾乎沒有應用平臺類的公司比如，像微軟，谷歌或臉譜公司這樣的公司，他們已經開發了一些其它商業或者應用程序依賴的服務和軟件。這就是公司利益的來源:應用平臺公司經常通過其工司資產分配和其附屬公司帶來大量的工作崗位。英國有專注于搜索軟件的公司奧托諾尼和為蘋果手機生產微型芯片的安謀公司。兩家公司都是其行業的領頭人，但是都不是一個行業巨頭。更加致命的是，他們是在倫敦金融時報指數主要證券中僅有的兩家創新型科技股。

　　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.

　　這里的確需要有更多這樣的公司。顯然，個人的創意和消費群體是關鍵，但是，對于英國科技發展的環境，仍有三個需要政府解決的問題。其中一個是缺少一個像美國公司擁有的那種大型市場。另一個問題就是新創立以及處于發展期的公司相對缺少資金。第三點就是缺少能夠將專業技術，商業頭腦以及超人膽識相結合的企業家，值得一提的，臉書的創始人，扎克伯格，就擁有這樣的膽識并拒絕了雅虎10億美元的收購報價。

　　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.

　　從一個市場形成伊始。你可能會認為距離和地理位置對于高科技公司來說是一個不重要的考慮因素。不過，這樣想你會錯的。對于美國公司來說，國內的3億把英語作為交流語言的消費者形成的市場就是一個巨大優勢。簡單的橫渡大西洋交流便能幫助英國公司征服美國市場;但是美國會鼓勵他們的公司競購這些有潛力的英國公司。歐洲不僅由于多種語言而不能形成統一的市場，同時也由于缺少一個合適地常規服務市場，其中包括數位服務，因此高科技公司必須一致克服各種各樣的法律和政治上的障礙來與歐盟貿易。數位企業應該能像手機公司諾基亞和沃達豐一樣從單一的市場獲利。對2006年通過的旨在將歐盟范圍內服務市場自由化建議的正確貫徹與執行,將是一個開始.

　　Wheres Britains Bill Gates?

　　英國的比爾?蓋茨在哪?

　　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.

　　讓我們一起來與認識英國的比爾?蓋茨。他原本在劍橋大學主修計算機科學專業輟學來到學習附近的硅谷開始自己創業。然后他在英國東部的迷你硅谷成立了一家新的科技公司。由于有來自城市的財政支持，他拒絕了外國公司收購的誘惑，最終使自己的公司在倫敦證券交易所上市。

　　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.

　　雖然只是想象的，但如果加入了必要的奮斗精神，這樣的自傳是看似合理的。在信息時代，沒有等同于18世紀工業革命的可以把英國帶上世界商業霸主的地位發明。在制藥和生物科技上的高超技術是數碼領域所無法模仿的。大衛?卡梅隆政府應該反思這次失敗并且找出其原因。運氣就是其中之一，英國本土和歐洲的管制以及對企業家冷淡的態度也是原因的一部分。

　　A nation of digital shopkeepers

　　作為數位公司的店主的國家

　　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.

　　英國有最大的網絡經濟。他的研究人員發明的既有網絡也有電腦。英國擁有語言優勢這個幫助他們和加州的硅谷以及印度高科技區域建立聯系，以及擁有好的大學。在布里斯托爾,倫敦一起英國的其他地區,許多科技公司的發展蒸蒸日上。比起其他歐洲國家，英國應該以技術行業領跑者的身份來與美國競爭。

　　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.

　　雖然英國有一些較大的科技公司，但是沒有一個大型的科技公司。特別是，英國幾乎沒有應用平臺類的公司比如，像微軟，谷歌或臉譜公司這樣的公司，他們已經開發了一些其它商業或者應用程序依賴的服務和軟件。這就是公司利益的來源:應用平臺公司經常通過其工司資產分配和其附屬公司帶來大量的工作崗位。英國有專注于搜索軟件的公司奧托諾尼和為蘋果手機生產微型芯片的安謀公司。兩家公司都是其行業的領頭人，但是都不是一個行業巨頭。更加致命的是，他們是在倫敦金融時報指數主要證券中僅有的兩家創新型科技股。

　　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.

　　這里的確需要有更多這樣的公司。顯然，個人的創意和消費群體是關鍵，但是，對于英國科技發展的環境，仍有三個需要政府解決的問題。其中一個是缺少一個像美國公司擁有的那種大型市場。另一個問題就是新創立以及處于發展期的公司相對缺少資金。第三點就是缺少能夠將專業技術，商業頭腦以及超人膽識相結合的企業家，值得一提的，臉書的創始人，扎克伯格，就擁有這樣的膽識并拒絕了雅虎10億美元的收購報價。

　　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.

　　從一個市場形成伊始。你可能會認為距離和地理位置對于高科技公司來說是一個不重要的考慮因素。不過，這樣想你會錯的。對于美國公司來說，國內的3億把英語作為交流語言的消費者形成的市場就是一個巨大優勢。簡單的橫渡大西洋交流便能幫助英國公司征服美國市場;但是美國會鼓勵他們的公司競購這些有潛力的英國公司。歐洲不僅由于多種語言而不能形成統一的市場，同時也由于缺少一個合適地常規服務市場，其中包括數位服務，因此高科技公司必須一致克服各種各樣的法律和政治上的障礙來與歐盟貿易。數位企業應該能像手機公司諾基亞和沃達豐一樣從單一的市場獲利。對2006年通過的旨在將歐盟范圍內服務市場自由化建議的正確貫徹與執行,將是一個開始.