« 八个建立人际关系的建议
“完成”的艺术 »

雅虎提供免费在线翻译

由 LifeBang 发表于Saturday, July 22nd, 2006

雅虎免费在线翻译网页翻译
雅虎(Yahoo)开始提供免费的在线翻译和网页翻译服务，提供中译英、英译中以及很多其它语种之间的翻译。既支持包括150词以内的在线翻译，也可以通过链接地址直接进行网页翻译。至于翻译的质量就智者见智了。
除此之外，雅虎翻译还提供针对网站制作者的服务，你可以为你的网页申请一个雅虎宝贝鱼，让网站提供翻译服务。
“雅虎翻译”–来自雅虎

相关内容

本文由Lifebang.com(生活帮)提供(转载请保留此链接)

11 Responses to “雅虎提供免费在线翻译”

  • 1
    雄
    September 5th, 2006 20:45

    When I was about eight,someone gave me a book about stars.I opened it and began to read.That was the beginning of my life’s work.When I was young,I didn’t use to have any money.I couldn’t buy expensive things,but I had my eyes.I used to go outside every night to look at the stars,with my eyes.

    There are billions of stars in the sky-but you can only see about 3,000 with your own eyes.Some people might say that it’s very difficult to learn the names of 3,000 stars.It isn’t!You can do it.Here is one way to start.

    Get a start map and begin to find your way though the sky.Many of the stars are in groups.The shaps of these groups never change.At different seasons,you will see different star groups.It is easy to learn the name of each group.When you know these,start to look at the stars inside each group.Not all stars are the same.Some are bigger,some are smaller.Some look white,some look red,some look blue.You’ll soon see all the different ones.

    Sometimes,you may see a star move.If you see it moving from one group to another,then it is not a star but a plant.You will be able to see Venus and Jupiter easily.They are both very bright.It is easy to see Mars,too.It looks red.You will soon begin to remember more and more.Then,you will never want to give up learning about the stars.

  • 2
    aweige
    April 2nd, 2007 19:06

    很好，给了很多的方便．

  • 3
    tony
    April 11th, 2007 21:22

    Very good!!!

  • 4
    张亮
    May 21st, 2007 16:29

    很好啊,方便的同时还能学到很多英语词汇,不错!~~!

  • 5
    carrot.meme
    June 1st, 2007 15:01

    very good

  • 6
    i-4
    August 1st, 2007 22:24

    蛤蛤太好了

  • 7
    zhengyucheng
    September 17th, 2007 16:01

    象香蕉，生姜一类是利用硫磺熏染的

  • 8
    小
    December 13th, 2007 18:56

    奥林匹克运动会是世界性的运动会，会集了全世界的运动精英，是关系到世界上每一个人的国际大事。而2008年的奥林匹克运动会将会在中国举行，因此它对我们国家的影响很大。为了迎接奥运，我们国家做了很充分的准备，例如新建了个体育场，做好各方面的宣传工作等等。第一，奥运会的举办能带动我国许多行业的发展，创建商机；第二，掀起了一阵体育热，让更多的人喜欢了运动，有利于我们的身体健康；最后，奥运会在我国举办，能提升我国的知名度和综合国力，有助于我国的发展。

  • 9
    wang
    January 16th, 2008 21:16

    look and see

  • 10
    龙
    February 25th, 2008 21:33

    对不起，我依然爱你 只是不能和你在一起

  • 11
    王向国
    March 6th, 2008 16:01

    Activity-Based Costing Issues for Small and Mid-Sized Manufacturers
    Several years ago, our firm partnered with the Michigan Manufacturing Technological Center on an “Agile Manufacturing” project sponsored by the Department of Defense’s Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA). As part of the project, we helped six small to mid-sized manufacturing firms (three plastic injection molders and three machining companies) implement activity-based costing. None of these firms, whose sales ranged from $5 million to $18 million with employment from 60 to 180, had the wherewithal to implement a comprehensive activity-based costing system, but all believed they could benefit from the type of information “abc” could provide. In this article, I discuss some of the major costing issues that were identified at these firms and summarize some of our findings, observations, and conclusions regarding “abc” and small to mid-sized manufacturing firms.
    Basic Concept of Activity-Based Costing
    In working with these manufacturers, we kept to the basic concepts of activity-based costing. We avoided ABC “jargon” as much as possible and developed our models using spreadsheets instead of special ABC software. We emphasized the ideas that: 1) costs are incurred because an organization performs activities, 2) those activities are performed because the organization makes and sells products, 3) activity-based costing first relates those costs that cannot be directly attributed to specific products to the activities that make the costs necessary, and 4) it then attributes the accumulated costs of the activities to the products that make the activities necessary. Cost to activities – activity costs to products.
    Pre-ABC Costing Practices
    Like most manufacturers, those in our project divided their activity costs into two basic categories: those related to manufacturing and those related to administration and sales. As a result, all activity costs were assigned to products on the basis of direct labor or equipment operating hours if they were manufacturing costs and as a general percentage add-on (either as an added cost or as part of the add-on margin) if they were administration or sales. The implication of a cost structure such as this is that all costs are either caused by the activities involved in manufacturing or are simply a general cost of being in business.
    In looking at our manufacturers through the “lens” of activity-based costing, we found that a substantial amount of the cost included in manufacturing were neither directly nor indirectly attributable to manufacturing and that most of the costs classified as administrative and sales were far from being “general.”
    Material Related Costs
    A material portion of our machining companies’ activity cost (7% to 9%) and an even more significant portion of our molders’ activity costs (9% to 12%) related to the acquisition, storage, and handling of “direct” materials, purchased or consigned components, and outside processing services. Using the logic of “abc,” these activity costs should ultimately follow the “direct” material, purchased or consigned components, and outside processing services to the jobs or projects on which they are used.
    Work at our project participants uncovered some significant issues in this area. Not surprisingly, the cost related to acquiring, handling, and storing companies’ repetitive, high-volume materials was relatively low. For example, although high-volume compounds accounted for 70%-90% of our molders direct material cost, the activities related to them required only 32%-34% of the material related activity costs. The balance of the material activity costs were attributable to a wide variety of low-volume or special materials, to outside processing services, or to excessive material movement. Similar relationships were found at the machining operations.
    At our molders, low-volume or special items included pre-colored materials, abrasive compounds, and purchased or consigned components. At the one participant where pre-colored material was an issue, the material activity per pound for pre-colored material was almost triple that for white or black material. We also found that abrasive compounds caused accelerated mold deterioration and higher mold maintenance costs at two of our sites. Finally, purchased components generally required more purchasing and quality control per dollar purchased than compounds, and, at one site, the storage and handling of customer consigned components cost the company close to $30,000 per year.
    All six sites contracted with outside processors to perform some manufacturing process or processes; three extensively (over $1,000,000 annually), and three less frequently ($100,000 - $150,000 annually). When the cost of activities existing to support these outsourced processes were attached to the prices charged by the vendors, they added 3% to 15% to the cost at sites making extensive use of outside processors and 20%-50% to the cost at those sites using outside processors less frequently.
    Finally, one company received and stored plastic compounds at a site location a mile from the manufacturing facility and incurred close to $150,000 annually in excess material handling costs. This added $0.03 to the cost of every pound of plastic used.
    111 Customer/Market Related Costs
    Four of the participants either sold their products in more than one marketplace or to more than one customer type. One sold to both automotive and non-automotive related customers. Another sold primarily to the automotive industry, but had one major customer whose buying habits varied considerably from all of its other customers. Still another sold to large and small OEMs as well as service division of OEMs and independent aftermarket organizations. The fourth company sold primarily to the aerospace industry, but had several offshore customers and one major domestic customer whose buying practices varied considerably from all of its other customers. In all instances, activity-based costing revealed cost differences that materially impacted product costs.
    The company selling to both automotive and non-automotive accounts found that costs related to operating in the auto industry added less than 8% to the activity cost of producing and selling automotive products while 11% was added to the cost of producing and selling parts to non-automotive customers. The impact was even more noticeable for the company with the one, unique customer. The behavior of this customer, which accounted for 20% of the company’s sales, caused it to incur over $50,000 in extraordinary support costs. The remaining business required only about $30,000 in such extraordinary support costs. The attribution of these costs to the one customer substantially reduced the profitability of its products.
    The company selling to both OEM and aftermarket customers found that costs related to operating in the OEM market added about 10% to the cost of producing and selling their products while dealing with the service divisions of OEMs added less than 5%. The biggest impact, however, was with its independent aftermarket customers where customer/market related costs added almost 30%, seriously lowering the profitability of products sold in that marketplace. The site selling to the aerospace industry found that over two-thirds of its selling and customer relations costs related to either the domestic customer with the unique buying practices or its offshore customers which together accounted for less than one-half of its sales. The result was that 30% needed to be added to cover customer/market costs for these customers compared to less than 13% for all others.
    Manufacturing Related Costs
    Although details varied, similar “abc” structures for manufacturing operations were developed at all six sites. The key common characteristics of these structures were:
    • Operating hours, not direct labor hours or dollars, were established as the primary driver of manufacturing activity costs. Depending on the company, these operating hours could be in the form of machine hours, cycle hours, cell hours, line hours, or press hours. It was agreed that operators, who had always been considered direct labor, were actually one of the indirect costs required to make the equipment operate.
    • Equipment was broken down into a limited number of “activity centers.” All sites agreed that calculating a separate rate for each piece of equipment would generate precise, but probably inaccurate and misleading cost information. Criteria for combining equipment into “activity centers” included each item’s asset value, level of variable cost consumption, level of support required, and level and consistency of operator involvement.
    • Set-ups were not included in overhead, but treated as separate direct activities. Although the means of charging set-ups to jobs and products varied, all sites agreed that the inclusion of set-ups in overhead rates made jobs with short production runs appear to be more profitable than they actually were at the expense of jobs with longer production runs, which were actually more profitable than they appeared.
    Other Costing Issues
    Other costing issues addressed during these “abc” implementations involved the administrative and support costs incurred each time an order was received or a shipment made, the impact of crew size variability on certain pieces of equipment, the cost of moving large parts from one operation to the next, and the appropriate means of applying legitimate “general and administrative” costs to individual products.
    ABC Impact on Product Costs
    The difference between product costs calculated using “activity-based” costing methods and those using traditional methods proved to be dramatic. The summary shown below shows the impact on four parts tested at one of the molding facilities. In the summary, unit costs calculated using existing costing practices are compared to the costs for the same products using the “activity-based” rates and methods.
    Difference
    Existing “abc” $ %
    Part A $1.4930 $1.3360 $0.1570 10.5%
    Part B $0.3650 $0.4886 $(0.1236) -33.9%
    Part C $0.1985 $0.2198 $(0.0213) -10.7%
    Part D $7.4600 $7.9287 $(0.4687) -6.3%
    A more relevant and revealing result can be seen when the cost of direct materials, purchased components, and outside processing are subtracted from the totals. These are the “non-activity” costs, or direct costs, that are the same under either method. The table below summarizes the differences in those costs addressed by activity-based costing:
    Difference
    Existing “abc” $ %
    Part A $0.6318 $0.4748 $0.1570 24.8%
    Part B $0.1050 $0.2286 $(0.1236) -117.7%
    Part C $0.0482 $0.0695 $(0.0213) -44.2%
    Part D $2.0435 $2.5122 $(0.4687) -22.9%
    As can be seen, product costs determined using over generalized, traditional costing methods can vary considerably from the “abc” costs which take into account the cost behavior that actually takes place within the business.
    Conclusion
    Knowledge of product cost is critical for any organization that hopes to maintain, or improve, its competitive position. This is especially true at small and mid-sized organizations that face ever increasing pressure from their customers to continually reduce the price of their products and services.
    The focus of this DOD sponsored project was, by design, on product costing. However, the “activity-based” cost information generated at each site also provided managers with 1) valuable process cost information which they were able to use to support their agile manufacturing efforts and 2) an “activity-based” model that made the accurate calculation of situation specific incremental costs possible to support myriad other management decisions.
    Activity-based costing is a practical tool that can be used by manufacturing companies of all sizes to not only better determine the cost of their products, but to better understand why they cost what they do. With this knowledge organizations can acquire a more profitable mix of products, identify those activities that are prime candidates for improvement, better use their limited capital funds, and generally make better business decisions. Without accurate and relevant cost information, managers are “flying blind” when making decisions. With “abc,” they can gain the vision necessary to direct their organization toward a more profitable future.

发表你的看法