Traduceri legalizate

—    Nu prea vad ce vrefi sa spuneti, Miss Marple, o intrerupse doctorul Lloyd.
—    Dumneavoastra presupune^i, nu-i asa, ca Sir Ambrose avea o afec^iune in care di-gitalina era daunatoare. Dar n-ayem nici o dovada ca ar fi asa. Ar putea la fel de bine sa fie si invers.
—    Invers ?
—    Da, n-a^i spus dumneavoastra ca este deseori prescrisa in bolile cardiace ?
—    Tot nu in^eleg. Miss Marple, unde vrefi sa ajungefi ?
Va asteptam mereu cu un zambet si traduceri legalizate de cea mai buna calitate livrate la timp. Va oferim traduceri profesioniste realizate de catre traducatori autorizati. Realizam traduceri din aproape orice domeniu : traduceri juridice (contracte, sentinte etc), traduceri tehnice (manuale de utilizare, fise tehnice etc), traduceri economice, financiar-bancare, medicale, din domeniul IT si multe altele.
—    S-ar ii putut foarte   bine  ca   Sir  Ambrose sa aiba digitalina in permanent,   fara sa trebuiasca s-o justifice. Ceea ce incerc sa spun    (intotdeauna    ma   exprim   greoi)   este aceasta.-sa presupunem   ca   cineva   vrea   sa otraveasca pe altcineva cu   o doza fatala   de digitalina. Cel mai simplu lucru nu e oare sa aranjeze in asa fel, incit   toata lumea   sa fie otravita cu frunze de digitalina ? In nici unul din cazuri nu va fi fatala, fireste, dar fn acelasi timp, nimeni nu va fi surprins  sa existe
o  victima ;   dupa    cum    spunea  si   doctorul Lloyd, aceste lucruri sint incerte. Nimeni nu se va intreba daca fata a mincat   o doza fatala de digitalina   traduceri autorizate sau   ceva   de felul   acesta. Putea foarte bine sa-i fi fost  amestecata  intr-un cocteil, sau in cafea, sau chiar sa-i fi fost administrate sub forma unei bauturi to-nice.
—    Vre^i sa spuneti ca Sir Ambrose si-a otravit pupila, pe fata incintatoare pe care o iubea ?
—    Exact, spuse Miss Marple. Vede^i cazul domnului Badger si al menajerei sale tinere. Sa nu-mi spuneti ca-i un lucru absurd ca un barbat de saizeci de ani sa se indragosteasca de o fata de douazeci. Se intimpla in fiecare zi. Indraznesc sa traduceri legalizate spun ca in cazul unui auto¬crat ca Sir Ambrose este nebunie curata, cum deseori se intimpla in asemenea impre-jurari. El n-a putut suporta gindul de a o ve-dea maritata — s-a si opus cit a putut — si a cedat. Gelozia lui nebuneasca a luat aseme¬nea proportii incit a preferat s-o omoare decit s-o lase linga tinarul Lorimer. Probabil ca avqa de mult in cap acest gind, devreme ce frunzele de degetel cresteau printre salvii. Le-ar fi cules chiar el. la un moment dat, si le-ar fi trimis la bucatarie chiar prin ea. E groaznic sa te gindesti la asta, dar cred ca trebuie sa privim mai compatimitor aceasta situatie. Barba^i, onorabili chiar, la virsta aceasta devin ciudati, mai ales cind e vorba

The Retail Paradigm

The retail paradigm is responsible for less than 30% of all software development. The cost of the software development is usually borne by a single manufacturer and the risk of failure is borne entirely by the manufacturer. The cost of development is distributed to customers if the product is successful on the market. Since it cannot directly distribute cost and risk until the product matures, manufacturers turn to investment markets as an external mechanism to distribute cost and risk. The need for outside capital is of long duration. Successful companies may re-invest profits in the development of subsequent software products rather than return to investment markets.

The overhead of the traditional brick-and-mortar retail sales paradigm is extremely high, with less than 10% of the money paid for the software by the end-user actually goes into product marketing, software development, and documentation. Microsoft spent only 16.8% of its 2004 revenues on R&D. The rest went into items such as the very expensive process of finding customers for Microsoft’s products: advertising, design and manufacture of an attractive package that that is discarded after the sale, payment to the retailer for shelf space, sales staff, and profit.

The retail model can only be used economically to create products for a mass market. A mass market will mask the inefficiency of the paradigm, as each customer can pay a relatively small cost compared to the cost of software development. Many software products cannot be created because they would not provide a large enough market to amortize both the cost of development and the large overheads. Moreover, many new products that could eventually build a large market will not be considered, because companies and investors cannot be convinced that such a market would develop, or the risk of failure is too high. This tends to damp innovation within this model.

The most important innovation in the last decade of global computer business, the web server and the browser, had to be developed as an open source product at a federally-funded university research laboratory. No company was convinced that it would be profitable. The only company that did invest in the project (Autodesk, Ted Nelson’s Xanadu Project) chose not to complete it due to the uncertain future revenue model.