<font id="nx377"><span id="nx377"><menuitem id="nx377"></menuitem></span></font>
        <cite id="nx377"><noframes id="nx377">
        <b id="nx377"></b>
        <mark id="nx377"><span id="nx377"></span></mark>

            <b id="nx377"><track id="nx377"><b id="nx377"></b></track></b>

              <font id="nx377"><track id="nx377"></track></font>



              when microsoft bought task management app wunderlist and mobile calendar sunrise in 2015, it picked up two newcomers that were attracting considerable buzz in silicon valley.

              microsoft’s own office dominates the market for “productivity” software, but the start-ups represented a new wave of technology designed from the ground up for the smartphone world.


              2015年,微軟收購任務管理應用wunderlist和移動日歷sunrise時, 挑選的是當時在硅谷名聲大噪的兩家新科技公司。微軟自創的office在“生產效率”軟件市場獨占鰲頭,而這兩家初創企業則代表了智能手機領域全新科技的一股新潮。


              both apps, however, were later scrapped, after microsoft said it had used their best features in its own products.

              their teams of engineers stayed on, making them two of the many “acqui-hires” that the biggest companies have used to feed their insatiable hunger for tech talent.




              to microsoft’s critics, the fates of wunderlist and sunrise are examples of a remorseless drive by big tech to chew up any innovative companies that lie in their path.

              “they bought the seedlings and closed them down,” complained paul arnold, a partner at san francisco-based switch ventures, putting an end to businesses that might one day turn into competitors.

              microsoft declined to comment.


              在微軟的批評者看來, wunderlist和sunrise的命運表明:科技巨頭會無情地蠶食一切阻礙其發展的創新公司??偛课挥谂f金山的switch風險投資公司合伙人保羅·阿諾德抱怨道,“他們買下這些初創企業然后將其關閉”,將那些有朝一日可能會成長為競爭對手的企業扼殺于搖籃。微軟拒絕對此置評。


              like other start-up investors, mr arnold’s own business often depends on selling start-ups to larger tech companies, though he admits to mixed feelings about the result:

              “i think these things are good for me, if i put my selfish hat on.

              but are they good for the american economy? i don’t know.”




              the us federal trade commission says it wants to find the answer to that question.

              this week, it asked the five most valuable us tech companies for information about their many small acquisitions over the past decade.

              although only a research project at this stage, the request has raised the prospect of regulators wading into early-stage tech markets that until now have been beyond their reach.




              given their combined market value of more than $5.5tn, rifling through such small deals—many of them much less prominent than wunderlist and sunrise—might seem beside the point.

              between them, the five biggest tech companies have spent an average of only $3.4billion a year on sub-$1bn acquisitions over the past five years—a drop in the ocean compared with their massive financial reserves, and the more than $130bn of venture capital that was invested in the us last year.


              鑒于這五家科技公司的總市值超過5.5萬億美元,匆忙審查這些小額收購(其中許多遠沒有wunder list、sunrise收購案引人注目)似乎有些避重就輕的味道。過去的五年中,這五大科技公司加起來平均每年只花34億美元用于10億美元以下的收購。這個數額同他們龐大的資金儲備以及去年在美國完成的1300多億美元的風險投資相比,無異于滄海一粟。


              however, critics say that the big companies use such deals to buy their most threatening potential competitors before their businesses have a chance to gain momentum, in some cases as part of a“buy and kill”tactic to simply close them down.




              31.what is true about wuderlist and sunrise after their acquisitions_______

              a.their market values declined

              b.their tech features improved

              c. their engineers were retained

              d.their products were re-priced


              31.wunder list和sunrise被收購后的真實情況如何?






              [定位] 由after their acquisitions定位至第二段首句中later。該段指出wunderlist、sunrise被收購后的情況:軟件被下架(句),工程師被留用(句),故[a]正確。

              [解密] [a] their engineers were retained同義改寫第二段句their…engineers stayed on。

              [b] 源于第六段句their…market value, 但此處談論的是“五大科技巨頭的市場價值巨大”而非“wunderlist與sunrise的市場價值下滑”。[c] 張冠李戴:由第二段句“微軟將它們的最佳性能融人自身產品”,可知科技性能得到提升的對象為微軟自家產品而非被收購的兩款應用。[d]利用首段句“微軟收購兩款軟件”與常識“換東家后會重新定價”捏造,但“重新定價”所含的信息“仍在市場上銷售”與第二段句所含的信息“被下架”相悖。

              [總結]四個選項的指向性很明確、辨識度也很高,對于此類事實細節題按照“回文定位法”最為合適。根據題干wunderlist and sunrise after their acquisitions直接定位至第二段, 該段兩句成段, 第一句指向“軟件的命運(下架)”,第二句指向“軟件工程師的命運(留用)”,與之相匹配的唯有[a],其余各選項要么捏造,要么偷換概念。

              32.microsoft’s critics believe that the big tech companies tend to________

              a.ignore public opinions

              b.treat new tech talent unfairly

              c.exaggerate their product quality

              d. eliminate their potentialcompetitors








              [定位] 由題干microsoft’s critics、big tech companies直接定位至第三段。該段句點明批評者的總觀點:科技巨頭會蠶食擋道的創新公司。句具體闡釋句:他們(科技巨頭)將那些有朝一日可能會成長為競爭對手的企業扼殺于搖籃??梢奫b]正確。

              [解密] [b] eliminate their potential competitors同義概述了第三段句的putting an end to businesses that might one day turn into competitors, 闡明了句中chew up any innovative companies that lie in their path的內涵。

              [a] 對第二段句said…best features in its own products斷章取義, 將文意“表示自家產品借鑒了被購軟件的最佳性能”曲解為“夸耀自家產品最佳,夸大產品質量”,且將微軟個體的行為泛化為所有大型科技公司的行為。[c] 歪曲第二段句中大型科技公司對科技人才的態度:將原文的“求賢若渴(their great hunger for tech talent) ”反向竄改為“不公正對待人才(treat…unfairly) ”。[d] 將第三段末句declined to

              comment所暗藏的“禮貌拒絕置評(decline:refuse politely to do sth) ”竄改為“忽略(ignore:pay no at tention to sth) ”。此外, [a] [c] [d] 均為作者陳述的事實, 并非題干所問的“批評者的觀點”。

              [總結] 本題考查人物觀點, 解答關鍵是鎖定人物觀點表達句。首先根據microsoft’s critics直接鎖定第三段句, 該句中a remorseless drive by big tech to chew up any innovative companies that lie in their path明確表達科技巨頭的傾向性行為(蠶食將阻礙其發展的任何創新公司) , 與之相匹配的唯有[b] 。

              33.paul arnold is concerned that small acquisitions might_______

              a. harm the national economy

              b.worsen market competition

              c.discourage start-up investors

              d.weaken big tech companies








              [定位] 首先由題干中paul arnold定位至第三、四段, 再由試題命制順序(上題已針對第三段設題)可進一步定位至第四段。該段首先指出,對于“科技巨頭收購初創企業”,阿諾德內心五味雜陳。


              [解密] 題干+[c] 是對第四段句疑問句式but are they good for the amerian economy?的正確解讀, harm體現了阿諾德的質疑態度:這類收購可能不利于美國經濟。


              [總結]本題依然考查人物觀點,但解答關鍵更在于利用人物站位排除部分干擾項,然后再借助其核心觀點句鎖定正確選項。首先, 文中paul arnold作為微軟批評者的代表人物出現, 對微軟所代表的做法“科技巨頭在初創企業成長為競爭對手前將其收購(鞏固科技巨頭的壟斷地位,杜絕新的市場競爭產生) ”持反對態度, 應首先排除[a] [b] 。接著, 根據題干中concerned所傳遞出的“疑慮, 擔憂”鎖定到第四段中情感表達詞mixed feelings以及疑問句式are they good for the american economy?所傳遞出的“對美國經濟的擔憂”,從而鎖定正確答案為[c]。

              34.the us federal trade commission intend to______

              a. examine small acquisitions

              b.limit big tech’ s expansion

              c.supervise start-ups’ operations

              d.encourage research collaboration








              [定位] 根據題干關鍵詞federal trade commission定位至第五段。該段句指出, ftc為了找到“科技巨頭收購初創企業是否對美國經濟不利”的答案,要求“五大科技公司提供其過去十年所進行的所有小額收購的相關信息”??梢?, ftc意欲審查科技巨頭小額收購行為, 以防對美國經濟不利,[c]正確。[解密] [c] 是對句中asked…for information about their many small acquisitions的同義轉述。[a] 由句中“要求提供”和“插手干預”等信息過度推導得來, 文中無據可依。[b] 對句only a research project(只是一個研究項目) 斷章取義, 但句中實際指向“ftc目前尚處研究調查階段, 尚未上升到政策措施等高度”,并未提及“政府要鼓勵合作式研究”。[d]將句“干預早期科技市場”錯誤理解為監管初創企業,句中實際指向“監督科技巨頭對初創企業的收購”。[總結] 本題考查ftc的行為目的, 可搜尋文內有關目的的表達詞, 找到答案信息, 即根據第五段句中wants to可鎖定其后find the answer to that question, 而追溯前文發現that question指向上段末句are they good for the american economy(they指向these things/selling start-ups to larger tech companies, 進而可知small acquisitions) , 進而可知ftc意在調查“小額收購對美國經濟的影響”, 與之相匹配的唯有[c] , 且由目標句(句) 后的解釋說明句(句) “ftc開始要求五大科技巨頭提供其過去十年來的小額收購信息”可進一步佐證。

              35.for the five biggest tech companies, their small acquisition have_______

              a. brought little financial pressure

              b.raised few management challenges

              c.set an example for future deals

              d. generated considerable profits








              [定位] 根據題目關鍵詞the five biggest tech companies可定位至第六段句。該句表明, 五大公司加起來每年用于小額收購的資金僅有34億美元,同它們的金融儲備相比,這筆錢無異于滄海一粟。再加上具體數字(3.4bilion vs130 billion) 的對比可知, 五大公司財力雄厚, 這些小額收購并未對公司財政造成多少壓力,故[a]正確。

              [解密] [a] 是對第六段句中only$3.4biliona year、a drop in the ocean compared with their massive financial reserves的合理推斷。

              [b]由常識“公司并購之后帶來的人員增長將會是一個管理問題”捏造,但文中并未提到任何“管理問題”。[c] 由第三段句中examples、in their path望文生義, 但該句實質指向“微軟收購wunder lit/sunrise是科技巨頭收購初創企業的眾多案例中的兩例”而非“為這類收購樹立了榜樣”。[d] 則將五大公司的巨額利潤歸功于他們所進行的小額收購,而文中并沒有出現相應的因果聯系。

              [總結]本題考查“小型收購對科技巨頭”的影響,實質于長難句處設題,意在考查學生明確復雜關系、了解特殊修辭、理解長難句的能力,解答關鍵在分解長難句主體,明確其語義要點。第六段句主體信息實為the five biggest tech companies(主語) have spent an average of only $3.4 billion a year(謂語部分) -a drop in the ocean compared with their massive financial reserves…(同位語) 。根據其中的情感表達詞only、a drop in the ocean、massive不難鎖定正確項為[a] 。



              您的電子郵箱地址不會被公開。 必填項已用*標注

              |京ICP備18012533號-296 无码一卡二卡三卡四卡视频版,亚洲一级无码一区二区三区,99任你躁在线视频观看,色丁狠狠桃花久久综合网