| |
帮忙翻译一段文章吧，自己水平有限，希望大家可以帮忙啊！
|
|
作者： xinyuzhe
01-01 08:00
回复
|
|
When our decisions turn out badly, we often recognize after the fact that we've failed to consider factors that are significant to those outside the immediate reach of our jobs or functional specialties. We say to ourselves, "I should have thought about how the employees in our European operation would have interpreted the wording of that memo" or "I should have thought about the state's road-repair program before choosing a site for our new distribution center." The integrative thinker, by contrast, actively seeks less obvious but potentially relevant factors. Of course, more salient features make for a messier problem, but integrative thinkers don't mind the mess. In fact, they embrace it, because it assures them that they haven't dismissed anything that may illuminate the problem as a whole. They welcome complexity, because that's where the best answers come from. They are confident that they'll find their way through it and emerge on the other side with a clear resolution.
In his thinking about a new business model for Red Hat, Bob Young added into his calculations something ignored both by software companies generally and by Linux suppliers in particular: the day-to-day concerns of corporate CIOs and their systems administrators. Doing this allowed him to envision an innovative model that tapped into an entirely new market for Linux-based products and services.
As a whole, the software industry disdains CIOs' reluctance to buy the newest and best technology, attributing it to timidity or strict adherence to the "you'll never get fired for buying IBM" mantra. Young not only empathized with the CIOs but found their caution understandable. "It's not FUD -- fear, uncertainty, and doubt," he said. "It's sensible."
Linux software was an entirely new product for corporate buyers, one that didn't follow any familiar rules. It was free. No one supplier controlled it. Thousands of versions were out there, and each one changed nearly every day. From the CIOs' perspective, that Linux was cheaper and better than Windows-based products -- the basic sales message delivered by Red Hat's rivals -- played a relatively small part in the calculation. The CIOs were thinking about whether their investment would be in a stable and consistent platform that would work across their organizations and whether their suppliers would still be around in ten or 15 years. Systems administrators worried that the complexity of Linux -- with its random and almost daily upgrades -- would create a management nightmare, since different teams of people throughout the company would have to maintain the software packages. |
|
| |
回复：帮忙翻译一段文章吧，自己水平有限，希望大家可以帮忙啊！
|
|
作者： lynodia
01-01 08:00
回复
|
|
当我们决定转坏, 我们常常承认事实后,我们没有考虑到的因素是重要的外界立即 达到我们的工作,或是专业功能. 我们要告诉自己, "我曾想过如何雇员在欧洲的行动将要诠释的字眼,便笺" 或者是"我要想想国家的道路维修方案,然后选择一个站点,对我们的新的配送中心" 综合思想家,但相比之下,积极寻求较明显,但潜在的相关因素. 当然,更为突出的特点作一个梅西耶的问题,而是综合性的思想家不介意的一塌糊涂. 事实上,他们拥抱, 因为它保证他们没有解雇任何可照亮整个问题. 他们欢迎复杂,因为那里的最佳答案从何而来. 他们有信心,他们就会找到自己的方式,通过它,并出现在对方有明确决议. 他在思考一个新的商业模式,红色的帽子, 鲍伯青年加入算尽一件既忽略了软件公司和一般Linux的供应商,特别是: 在日常关注企业CIO和系统管理员. 这样,让他设想一种创新模式,开发成一个全新的市场,基于Linux的产品和 服务. 作为一个整体,软件业不屑一顾的CIOS者不愿购买最新和最好的技术, 归功于它胆怯或不严格遵循"您永远不会发射购买IBM的"符咒. 年轻不仅疼惜与CIO的,但发现他们的谨慎可以理解. "这不是巫统的Logo --恐惧,不确定性和怀疑, "他说. "这是明智的. "
Linux软件是一个全新的产品,公司采购员,一,不遵守任何规则的熟悉. 它是免费的. 没有一家供应商控制. 数以千计的版本有问题,而且每一个变化,几乎每天都有. 从CIO的角度来看, Linux的,是便宜,比基于Windows的产品--基本促销讯息发表Red Hat的对手-- 发挥比较小部分,在计算. 总监的人的思考,是否自己的投资将会在一个稳定而一致的平台,将横跨工作 他们的组织和他们的供应商仍围绕在10年或者15年. 系统管理员担心复杂的Linux --与其随机和几乎每天升级--营造一个 管理恶梦,因为不同的队伍,在全国人民的公司要保持软件包. |
|
| |
回复：帮忙翻译一段文章吧，自己水平有限，希望大家可以帮忙啊！
|
|
作者： gao3655938
06-30 09:28
回复
|
|
去网上茬茬，要去翻译网！ |
|
|
