The table sheds light on the market share of different notebook computer manufacturers in 2 different years, 2006 and 2007 respectively. 7 different categories along with their market share are shown in the table.
There are 6 different companies mentioned namely, HP, Dell, Acer, Toshiba, Lenovo, Fujitsu-Siemens, and a final category named as others. The major market share has been occupied by HP in both of the years. The Fujitsu-Siemens manufacturer has the lowest share in both 2006 as well as 2007. Acer, Dell and HP combined have more than half of the market share in both consecutive years.
The share of the others category decreased by 2.5 percentage from year 2006 to 2007. Dell has almost 4 folds more the share as Fujitsu-Siemens in 2006, this further increased to around 5 times in 2007. HP has almost 1/3 of the market share in both of the years. Acer's share decreased by around 1.7 percentage from 2006 to 2007. Fujitsu-Siemens's share has nearly halved from 4.8 percentage 2006 to 2.3 percentage 2007. The biggest change in percentage has happed with Dell's whose share has been increased by 3.8 percentage.
- The table below shows the worldwide market share of the notebook computer market for manufacturers in the years 2006 and 2007 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- The diagram below shows the water cycle which is the continuous movement of water on above and below the surface of the Earth 56
- The maps show changes to Felixstone Town Write a report to a university professor 67
- The two pie charts below show some employment patterns in Great Britain in 1992 67
- The table below shows the worldwide market share of the notebook computer market for manufacturers in the years 2006 and 2007 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 275, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
...turer has the lowest share in both 2006 as well as 2007. Acer, Dell and HP combined have m...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 18, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'others'' or 'other's'?
Suggestion: others'; other's
... consecutive years. The share of the others category decreased by 2.5 percentage fr...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, well, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 33.7804878049 92% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 941.0 965.302439024 97% => OK
No of words: 189.0 196.424390244 96% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97883597884 4.92477711251 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.70779275107 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94323553671 2.65546596893 111% => OK
Unique words: 96.0 106.607317073 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.507936507937 0.547539520022 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 270.9 283.868780488 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 0.0 3.36585365854 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.4926829268 67% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 24.9716505929 43.030603864 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 78.4166666667 112.824112599 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.75 22.9334400587 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.66666666667 5.23603664747 32% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 3.70975609756 297% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.241690562798 0.215688989381 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.116038740271 0.103423049105 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0686412140129 0.0843802449381 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.188818016848 0.15604864568 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0540753755934 0.0819641961636 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.9 13.2329268293 75% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 73.17 61.2550243902 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.8 10.3012195122 66% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 11.4140731707 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.22 8.06136585366 90% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 40.7170731707 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.4329268293 74% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.9970731707 73% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.0658536585 63% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.