The table shows the worldwide market share of the mobile phone market for manufacturers in the years 2005 and 2006.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant
The table compares the global market share of the cell phone trade in terms of producers in 2005 and 2006.
Overall, the figures of Nokia, Motorola and Sony Ericsson increased over 1 years while the remained manufacturers lost their market share in the same time. Nokia and Motorola also accounted for the largest proportion in contrast with Ben Q Mobile and LG.
In 2005 there was 32,5 percent of the market share belonged to Nokia, which was followed by Motorola with 17,7%. These figures both significantly grew up to 35% and 21,1% in 2006, respectively. Moving in similar trend at a lower level, Sony Ericsson started with 6,3% in 2005 then considerably went up to 7,4% in 2006.
As a result, Samsung rank third in the table with 12,7 percent of market share in 2005 then declined to 11,8% in 2006. In the meantime, LG’s figure slightly fell from 6,7% in 2005 to 6,3% in 2006 while that data of Ben Q Mobile dropped nearly by half from 4,9% to 2,4%. Besides, the proportion of others manufacturers accounted for 19,2% in 2005 also decreased to 16,2% in 2006.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-05-18 | Jasmineeee | 56 | view |
| 2019-04-12 | duchoangg24 | 67 | view |
| 2018-12-01 | Minh Pham | 78 | view |
| 2017-12-02 | sherin rijo | 84 | view |
| 2017-07-02 | lauranguyen | 67 | view |
- The pie charts below show the average household expenditures in Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 33
- The graph below shows the changes in UK birth rate of women in 6 different age groups from 1973 to 2008 87
- The chart shows the division of household tasks by gender in Great Britain 73
- The table shows the Proportions of Pupils Attending Four Secondary School Types between 2000 and 2009 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 47
- The chart below shows the percentage of female members of parliament in 5 Europe countries from 2000 to 2012 77
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, if, so, then, third, while, in contrast, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 2.0 7.0 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 33.7804878049 127% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 891.0 965.302439024 92% => OK
No of words: 188.0 196.424390244 96% => OK
Chars per words: 4.73936170213 4.92477711251 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.70287850203 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49881705829 2.65546596893 94% => OK
Unique words: 105.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558510638298 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 248.4 283.868780488 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 23.3190432432 43.030603864 54% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 99.0 112.824112599 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8888888889 22.9334400587 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.44444444444 5.23603664747 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.273109759921 0.215688989381 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117034835359 0.103423049105 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0681964472735 0.0843802449381 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.183254970826 0.15604864568 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0588324323232 0.0819641961636 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.2329268293 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 76.56 61.2550243902 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 10.3012195122 74% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.21 11.4140731707 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.99 8.06136585366 99% => OK
difficult_words: 40.0 40.7170731707 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.4329268293 74% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.0658536585 72% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.