姍姍來遲的蘋果中國研發中心(1)
Until recently, Apple research and development centres never fell far from the tree. The group still does no significant research and development outside the US. Its head office in Cupertino keeps a strong hold on the core design of its products.
直到最近，蘋果(Apple)的研發中心從未與總部相隔太遠。該集團目前依然沒有重要的研發工作放在美國之外。蘋果在庫比蒂諾(Cupertino)的總部依然牢牢掌控着其產品的核心設計。
Last week, though, chief executive Tim Cook said Apple planned to open a research centre in China, where its products are made, rather than researched or developed. He has strong commercial reasons to plant more Apple flags.
然而，蘋果首席執行官蒂姆•庫克(Tim Cook)上週表示，蘋果計劃在中國設立一個研究中心。蘋果的產品在中國製造，但卻不是在中國研究或者開發出來的。從商業角度而言，庫克有充分理由在更多地方插上蘋果的旗幟。
Apple sales in China have been dented by local rivals such as Huawei. Mr Cook’s announcement came while he met vice premier Zhang Gaoli — a reminder that R&D centres punch above their weight politically.
蘋果在華銷售遭到華爲(Huawei)等中國本土競爭對手的蠶食。庫克是在和中國副總理張高麗會面時宣佈此事的——這提醒人們，從政治角度而言，研發中心具有超乎其本身的重要性。
Foreign investors do not have to commit much money or employ many scientists to build an R&D hub, but the suggestion that they detect some magical innovation-fertiliser in the local water is like catnip to politicians.
外國投資者不必投入太多錢或僱傭太多科學家就能建立一個研發中心，但是，外國投資者在當地水土中發現了某種神奇“創新肥料”的跡象，對政治人士而言就像貓薄荷之於貓一樣有巨大的吸引力。
In return for handing over the keys to land, granting planning permission and even ladling on subsidies, the mayor or minister briefly gets to look as clever as the people the new R&D hub will hire.
市長或者部長移交土地使用權、授予規劃許可、甚至是大量提供補貼，作爲回報，他們在短時間裏能夠顯得像新研發中心將要僱傭的那些人一樣聰明。
The question in Apple’s case is what took it so long?
就蘋果而言，令人不解的問題是它爲何花了這麼長時間才做出這一決定呢？
Multinationals’ habit of setting up research centres abroad is more than 50 years old, and international companies’ interest in setting down research roots in developing countries dates at least to the early 2000s.
跨國公司在海外設立研究中心的慣用做法可以追溯到50多年前，而跨國企業在發展中國家設立研究分支的興趣至少可以追溯到2000年代初。
When IBM wanted to establish a non-US R&D centre in the 1950s, it sent an engineer called Arthur Samuel to scout sites in Europe.
上世紀50年代，IBM想要在美國以外建立一個研發中心，於是派出一個名叫阿瑟•塞繆爾(Arthur Samuel)的工程師在歐洲尋覓合適的地點。
Samuel described the London suburbs he visited as “the most dismal places that I have ever seen”. He was drawn instead to Zurich by its “proximity to talent”.
塞繆爾把他到訪的倫敦郊區稱爲“我見過的最差勁的地方”。相反，“接近人才”的蘇黎世吸引了他。
This remains among the most popular reasons for companies’ choice of foreign R&D locations, according to fDi Markets, the Financial Times’ cross-border investment research service.
英國《金融時報》旗下跨境投資研究服務機構fDi Markets的研究表明，這一點依然是企業將某個地點選爲海外研發中心地址的原因中最普遍的一個。
IBM’s Swiss facility fostered four Nobel laureates but R&D strategy has since evolved to put fast-growing markets and customers closer to the centre.
IBM的瑞士研發中心培養了4名諾貝爾獎得主，但此後研發中心的選址策略轉變爲讓研發中心更靠近快速發展的市場和客戶。
Jaideep Prabhu of Cambridge’s Judge Business School says Apple might have held back from China so far because of worries about intellectual property leaking into a market notorious for knock-offs of its flagship products.
英國劍橋大學(Cambridge)嘉治商學院(Judge Business School)的賈伊迪普•普拉布(Jaideep Prabhu)表示，蘋果一直到現在才決定在中國設立研發中心的原因，可能是蘋果擔憂其知識產權會泄露——中國是一個因爲“山寨”蘋果旗艦產品而聲名狼藉的市場。
But when he studied the research centre phenomenon in the mid-2000s, he found many large companies were already challenging the idea that R&D was “too important to be offshored”.
但當他研究了2000年代中期的研發中心現象後，他發現很多大公司已經在挑戰這一觀念，即研發“太重要，以至於不能設在海外”。
The quality of skilled local researchers was the main attraction of Bangalore or Shanghai. The fact they could be hired for much less than in New York or Silicon Valley added to the allure.
當地高水平的熟練研究人員是班加羅爾或者上海的主要吸引力。再者，企業能夠以比在紐約或者硅谷低得多的成本僱傭這些人員也增強了這些地方的吸引力。
