It is generally believed that the more technology are available, the wider is the gap between social layers due to the appearance prohibitively expensive high technology and list of ‘have and have-not’ devices. On the other hand, some individuals side will that increasing availability of technology has the opposite impact since all organizations specialized on technologies tend to expand their field of influence.
There are definitely some reasons to be convinced that technologies increase the gap between wealthy and indigent. First of all, with the advent of new devices, a new phenomen of ‘must have’ technologies has risen, which has resulted in stereotypic expectations within society that everybody ought to have some modes of technologies such as smartphones and computers. Most of them are highly available for people with average standards of living, nevertheless, those whos quality of life is lower than me medieare cannot afford ‘must-have’ devices. That is why there Image in eyes of society falls down. Furthermore, modern high-tech equipment are extremely costy and only set of affluent individuals can purchase it, in particular, demanded 3D printer or nanotechnologies.
On the other hand, owing to gaining popularity of new technologies, all highly-demanded companies attempt to narrow the gap and sell the products which are affordable for both well-off and poor customers. Therefore, airline companies such as American Airline Groups or United Continental Holdings provide people with low-cost tickets in order to expand their niche and bridge the gap. Likewise, widespread ternational companies produce highly-available electronics As for example, Nokia, Motorola companies cover wider range of social layers, which is why they provide technologies for everyone on the market. Both companies and customers take tremendous benefits from this, expanding their coverage and buying modern technologies respectively.
On the whole, despite having unaffordable, expensive products on the market, in the recent time, much more companies are trying to make their products available for all people. Therefore, personally, I am convinced that availability of new technologies narrows the gap between affluent and indigent people.
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004. 56
- In some countries the high rates of crimes are committed by teenagers why this has happened the effects of the happenings 67
- The diagram shows how salt is removed from sea water to make it drinkable.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 61
- The diagram shows the process by which milk and related products are produced Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features Write at least 150 words 73
- The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by a particular UK school in 1981 1991 and 2001 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 478, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: who's
...tandards of living, nevertheless, those whos quality of life is lower than me mediea...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, if, likewise, nevertheless, so, therefore, well, as for, for example, in particular, such as, first of all, on the whole, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1951.0 1615.20841683 121% => OK
No of words: 334.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.84131736527 5.12529762239 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27500489853 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.33209321715 2.80592935109 119% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.589820359281 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 621.0 506.74238477 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 52.7371510474 49.4020404114 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 150.076923077 106.682146367 141% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6923076923 20.7667163134 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.2307692308 7.06120827912 173% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186540463202 0.244688304435 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0741573688149 0.084324248473 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.062829037968 0.0667982634062 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120760429153 0.151304729494 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0360744177372 0.056905535591 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.9 13.0946893788 144% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 20.72 50.2224549098 41% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 11.3001002004 147% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.89 12.4159519038 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.03 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 78.4519038076 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.5 9.78957915832 169% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => 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.