Currently people are exposed to a vast variety of technology and it is developing so rapidly, that an item purchased today becomes redundant tomorrow and will be replaced with something more unique and advanced. Some people are of the view that this variety of range is increasing the gap between the poor and rich while others are of an opposite opinion. This essay will discuss both perspectives and argue that technology is in fact bridging the gap between people of different strata of society.
To begin with, developing better technology involves high costs and the same is attached to the item which in turn is borne by whom? The final consumer! People who have money at their disposal prefer to indulge in such luxuries whereas those with limited financial capacity cannot afford to do so. To cite an example, the rich can choose from a number of cars available in the market to keep abreast with the latest technology, while the poor have to either use public transport or drive around in their car till it has to be scrapped. Therefore, technology mostly caters to people of high class as they are their target customers and very little is done keeping the poor in mind, consequently, increasing the gap.
On the contrary, nowadays there are a variety of affordable products available and one need not shell out huge amount of money to possess it. Modern technology is now striving to make products that are cheaper and easily accessible thus closing the gap. For example, cheaper mobiles like oppo contain similar features that are available in a high end phone like I-phone therefore making it possible for everyone to have an advanced mobile phone. Furthermore, due to cut throat competition these days, priority is given to developing cheap and easily available technology.
To sum it up, although in early time technology could not be afforded by everyone, constant efforts are now being made to change that. I strongly believe that technology brings people closer and keeping the current scenarios in mind people are willing to invest in better technology to lead a better life!
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, furthermore, if, so, therefore, thus, whereas, while, as to, for example, in fact, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 13.1623246493 160% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 41.998997996 136% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 8.3376753507 12% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1751.0 1615.20841683 108% => OK
No of words: 353.0 315.596192385 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96033994334 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33454660006 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57250937655 2.80592935109 92% => OK
Unique words: 208.0 176.041082164 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.589235127479 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 570.6 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => 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: 27.0 20.2975951904 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 35.0723681253 49.4020404114 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.692307692 106.682146367 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1538461538 20.7667163134 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.76923076923 7.06120827912 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.32356639442 0.244688304435 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109793783985 0.084324248473 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.118697528997 0.0667982634062 178% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181188315639 0.151304729494 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.108951528739 0.056905535591 191% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 50.2224549098 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.4159519038 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.73 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.1190380762 126% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.