William Joyce s Eveline - A Guided Epiphany - 1014 Words

A Guided Epiphany In â€Å"Eveline,† the main character, Eveline, lives a terrible life with a stern father, a miserable occupation, and a dreary home. When she is offered the chance to leave her abysmal life and start a new one with her lover Frank, she rejects this proposition and remains in Ireland. Immediately this presents the reader with a paradox. Why did Eveline stay? Wasn’t her life terrible? It is not until the reader digs a little deeper into â€Å"Eveline† does the paradox solve itself. Joyce uses various literary techniques to help the reader understand why Eveline did not leave with Frank. In order to solve Eveline’s paradox, Joyce employs sentence structure to elaborate how important the father and Frank are to Eveline. The father is given much longer sentences than any of the other characters, such as â€Å"He said she used to squander the money, that she had no head, that he wasn t going to give her his hard-earned money to throw about the streets, and much more, for he was usually fairly bad on Saturday night.† (Joyce 65-68), and â€Å"When they were growing up he had never gone for her like he used to go for Harry and Ernest, because she was a girl; but latterly he had begun to threaten her and say 3 what he would do to her only for her dead mother s sake. â€Å" (55-58) contain forty words and forty eight words each respectfully. Frank, when he is first introduced, is also given slightly longer sentences. The third sentence in Frank’s introduction, â€Å"She was to go away with

Han China vs. Mauryan/Gupta India Essay - 1132 Words

Analyze similarities and differences in methods of political control in the following empires in the classical period. Han China (206 B.C.E.-220 C.E.) Mauryan/Gupta India (320 B.C.E.-550 C.E.) During the Classical period, Han China and Mauryan/Gupta India developed many methods of political control. Although these empires were located in different geographic regions, they both used social hierarchy, language, bureaucracy, and religion as a means of political control. Many of Classical India’s religious beliefs and bureaucratic practices contrasted each other in relation to the ways that they supported the methods of political control. Like Han China, Classical India used their social structure system as a method of political†¦show more content†¦In contrast, India created a bureaucracy allowing local rulers to maintain regional control. This concept of regionalism brought about political diversity in India. China was unified in relation to their ruler, code of law, and economical practices, but India was divided in relation to their rulers, codes of law, and economical practices. Because of this regional practice, the Indian empire continued to expand , adding more regions their area, and eventually leading to political instability. Han China used its centralized bureaucratic system to control the population by a unified code of law and a strong army. Classical India used the concept of regionalism to control a larger population by using local rulers that governed different areas by different laws and punishments. In contrast to Han China’s official Mandarin language, Classical India did not develop a unified language. During the Zhou Dynasty, the Chinese created the language of Mandarin. As a centralized dynasty, China made Mandarin its official spoken language, and brought about linguistic unity in the empire. Whereas, Classical India, being a regional empire, did not require a unified language considering the separated areas that could speak different languages and dialects in each region. The development of Mandarin aided Han China by creating a unified language that would enhance trade and communication inside t heShow MoreRelatedCompartive Essay on Han Dynasty and Mauryan/Gupta Dynasties615 Words   |  3 PagesHan Dynasty (China) vs. Mauryan/Gupta Dynasties (India) The Han Dynasty lasted from 206 BCE – 220 BCE, and was in China. The Mauryan and Gupta Dynasty lasted from 322 BCE – 500 CE, and were in India. The Mauryan Dynasty ended by 185 BCE. The Gupta Dynasty started in 320 CE. In my essay I am going to be comparing and contrasting the 3 dynasty’s (2 of them as 1), and their control through religion, trade, male dominance, and how they fell. The Han Dynasty controlled their empire through Confucianism

Exploitative and Explorative R and D †Free Samples to Students

Question: Discuss about the Exploitative and Explorative R and D. Answer: Introduction Innovation is a field of study that is simply just a new method, idea or device. However, it is also often regarded as the application of better answers that are meeting unarticulated needs, new requirements or any already existing market needs (Fagerberg, Martin Andersen 2013). Inside the information and communication technology sector, the mobile phone industry has become a very innovative segment. Technical advancements and new product proliferation have molded this industry into an extremely dynamic one. This has happened even after the market shares are extremely concentrated in the hands of a few giants in the industry (Cecere, Corrocher Battaglia 2015, p.162-175). Innovation is the core of every successful product, organization or new venture. Apple Inc. is no exception to that. From their iPod to their Apple Newton to iPhone, Apple, Inc. from the beginning itself have provided the pomp and performance. The iPhone has transformed the mobile phone business completely, along w ith the internet economy and society as a whole. Before iPhone, touchscreens appeared on Apples own Newton. However, what made iPhone transformative in nature was the shift in the concept of underpinning the whole iPhone project. Its designers made it into a full-fledged hand-held computer making calls and browsing (Cartwright 2016, p.669-671). Major Technological Developments That Contributed to the Success Of iPhone Ron Wayne, Steve Wozniak, and Steve Jobs together founded Apple, Inc. in 1976. After Wayne left the company, Wozniak presented and designed Apples first computer, the Apple I, to Hewlett Packard (HP). Even though HP was not impressed and did not pursue the venture, Jobs and Wozniak continued to develop and sell their computers. In 1980s and early 1990s, the new versions of Macintosh and the new computers helped Apple do well in their sales. After Jobs became the CEO of Apple, Inc. in 1997 he introduced the iMac, which did huge sales in 1998. From that point onwards the company started doing well. Under the leadership of Jobs, Apple started the introduction of many new and innovative products one at a time. The market bombing iPod and iPhone were introduced in 2001 and 2007 respectively. 2008 recorded an iTunes store sale more than Wal-Mart. The innovation streak continued in 2010 with the introduction of iPad (Apple.com 2017). Inside the computer hardware industry, technology plays a huge role in influencing the success of any company. Innovation in technical progresses offers a faster, cheaper and better electronic product each year, as it also is instrumental in creating a market segment because of the new products and markets created. Thus, the technological innovation makes the industry fiercer overall each and every year. However, even after the large increase in the worldwide tablet shipments in 2011 reflected the interest of consumers shifting from PCs to smartphones and tablets, there is the threat of new rival products leading to the decrease in the demand for Apple products. Technological changes occur swiftly and Apple needs to keep up with these changes in technology if they do not wish to be left behind their rivals (Mudambi Swift 2014, p.126-145). Smartphones existed even before iPhone was introduced in the market. Still it was the increasing technological innovative adoptions by Apples iPhone like larger touchscreen, the app stores, ease of use option and an overall improved experience that helped iPhone become a mainstream option. Apple has always been a company who had no qualms about technological standards and easily tossed aside the old and ushered in the new. This is what makes the company great. Apple has always repurposed and refined the existing technologies so that they can fundamentally resonate with the end users. Multitouch technology existed long before iPhone adopted it and made it into something magical. The fingerprint sensor technology was not new, but was not used by consumers a lot. After Apple rolled out their touchID other manufacturers followed suit after seeing the success it brought. The USB feature of Bondi Blue iMac was bold and ambitious at the time it came out and then turned into a defacto periph eral standard (Riikonen et al. 2013, p.563-572). iPhone As A Disruptive Innovation The term disruptive innovation was first coined by Clayton Christensen to define the process by which products or services moves up the market, displacing established competitors (Christensen 2013). Disruptive innovation for iPhone happened years ago in the mobile phone industry. People struggled with the first iPhone as a disruptive innovation as it was comparatively expensive at that time, but notice should be given to what it was. At the time of iPhones introduction in 2007 the market rulers in the smartphone segments were BlackBerrys, Palm Treos, Motorola Qs and Symbian smartphones. At that time, the most important attributes were messaging and email, running applications, phone and speaker quality, durability, information access on the web and good battery life. All the smartphone operating systems during that time had developed from PDAs, regular mobile phones and pagers (Goggin 2012). The iPhone was launched in 2007, with a large screen, powerful processor and OS and a huge internal memory. It even boasted of an innovative user experience that used the hardware power with zooming, fluid scrolling and the capacity to repaint the screen swiftly. At the time of its launch it was not a very good smartphone according to the standards of that time. Typing was problematic and email function did not work properly. Phone and speaker quality was comparatively poor, the overall phone was fragile. Full internet access was available from the web browser, but was actually unusable. But iPhone moved past that (Support.apple.com 2017). Steve Jobs described the phone as internet in our pockets and of good value because of the phone, iPod and internet function availability. Smartphones at that provided access to internet, but with a bad user experience. Apple made use of WiFi for providing the internet in the pocket experience to its users via the iPhone, which ultimately made the Safari and Google maps use an incomparable experience. This characterized a new market disruptive innovation (Golijan 2013). The path followed by the disruptive innovation was bringing improvement in the iPhone as a competent computing platform and the bandwidth on the wireless network. Apple added more memory, better screens, appstore, and faster processors. The faster wireless network speed enabled a WiFi like experience to turn into a wireless network, bringing in the actual disruption and the whole sector of smartphone manufacturers of got disrupted. Creating a WiFi experience and then translating it to the mobile network as soon as the capabilities bettered is what is tagged as a network disruption. Containing full access to internet and powerful application over the wireless network is what has redefined the meaning of smartphone. Newton was supposed to do for the PDA market what iPhone ultimately went on to do for the mobile market. It sported a sleek design and even had several interesting features (Panizzi Vitulli 2012, p. 782-783). Innovation Theory It's basic to observe that the condition Apple made with the iPhone was vastly not exactly the same as what was expected by Christensen's model of disruptive innovation, regardless of the way that thinking back his theory of value chain evolution was accurate. That is the reason after the iPhone was accounted for, Christensen foreseen the device to miss the mark. As showed by Christensen, all together for an invention to be truly "disruptive", it must start as something with cut down performance yet after some time finishes adequate performance to get the bigger piece of a market at a much lower price. That is not what Apple did. From the soonest beginning stage the iPhone has gave off an impression of being a first class and high-price plan that people hurried to a significant long time (Christensen, Raynor McDonald 2015, p.44-53). The major theory of "Integrative Innovation" is the likelihood that a market's ability to grasp more performance and hold higher prices will augment as showed by the number and value of jobs to be done that have been consolidated into one device in a way that is clear and easy to use. Christensen's theory of disruptive innovation expect that remembering the ultimate objective to be disruptive, products must focus on one job to be done, start at the low-end, upgrade performance after some time and over the long haul end up being satisfactory to get a far reaching some portion of the market (King Baatartogtokh 2015, p.77). This new framework is in a general sense the inverse. As opposed to starting as not satisfactory and moving in performance and cost, Integrative Innovation is tied in with solidifying distinctive jobs into one and influencing an unrivaled/high-to cost respond in due order regarding begin with and quickly moving down in cost to get sweeping parts of the market. iPhon e fits this theory awesome. In September 2007, just two or three months after launch, Apple decreased the price of the iPhone altogether and inside two or three years even developed a lower-cost model called the 5C (Chemers 2014). The best part about Integrative Innovation and Disruptive Innovation is that they can agree smoothly together and basically address two negating sorts of preoccupation changing innovations. Failure of Apple Newton As believed among the product lore, high profile gadgets that get lost or killed are more often than not are comparatively more interesting than the ones that succeed. Yet in the history of those killings, nothing can be compared to the situation with Apple Newton MessagePad. The product was not simply killed; it was violently slain in its young age by one of technologys great men. Sadly, it was a remarkable device, a product whose influence we still sense today. At that time, handheld devices were just a matter of science fiction. With Newton, Apple set out to create an entirely new device, a completely new class of computing. The idea was to make computers lip into the pockets of people and go with them out in the world. In fact, the pocket-based design was a core requirement. The requirement of the device included having a pen, a radio working on a pager frequency, designable built in forms and templates, and having the capacity to act as a seamless input device for a PC. The numb er one requirement it had to fit in was inside peoples pocket. Focus was given on width to make the holding experience more secure and comfortable (Nair Leng 2012, p.21). The result of all these work and effort gave birth to a completely new form of device that ran a completely new and bold design language. The only major problem has handwriting. By 1993, they barely got it functioning when they started shipping it. Handwriting recognition was decided to be Newtons killer feature, and yet it went on to become the main feature that killed the product. Character recognition problems in Newton became the centre of the jokes, most commonly in Doonesbury comic strips. The situation was devastating. The negativity was a huge blow to the team who had dedicated everything into the Newton. They immediately went back to work and got the glitch sorted. However, it was too late. The character recognition feature got corrected and it came out just flawless and phenomenal. However, there came out another stumbling block the once joy to use device never got a second look. The biggest clampdown for Newton was that Steve Jobs himself hated it because of the poor perf ormance and even mocked the novel input mechanism. At that time, Apple had way too many projects and there was nothing more to do with Newton. Looking back, Newton had lofty goals that were out before the necessary technology to sustain it become commonplace (Honan, 2013). Conclusion People wondered what made Apple, Inc. so successful. The main determinants are Jobs leadership and visionary approach towards innovation, and quality of product Apple delivered. Apples operations have been effective from the beginning itself, and they have been able to garner the required attention and sales volume for moving ahead. Disruptive or not, Apple has been able to capture the market share and peoples mind as being the greatest mobile company ever. References Apple.com. 2017. Apple. [online] Available at: https://www.apple.com/ [Accessed 21 Aug. 2017]. Cartwright, J., 2016. Technology: Smartphone science. Nature, 531(7596), pp.669-671. Cecere, G., Corrocher, N. Battaglia, R.D., 2015. Innovation and competition in the smartphone industry: Is there a dominant design?.Telecommunications Policy,39(3), pp.162-175. Chemers, M., 2014. An integrative theory of leadership. Psychology Press. Christensen, C.M., 2013. The innovator's dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail. Harvard Business Review Press. Christensen, C.M., Raynor, M.E. McDonald, R., 2015. Disruptive innovation. Harvard Business Review, 93(12), pp.44-53. Fagerberg, J., Martin, B.R. Andersen, E.S. eds., 2013. Innovation studies: evolution and future challenges. OUP Oxford. Goggin, G., 2012. Cell phone culture: Mobile technology in everyday life. Routledge. Golijan, R. 2013. Steve Jobs' greatest products. [online] msnbc.com. Available at: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/44805821/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/t/steve-jobs-greatest-products/ [Accessed 21 Aug. 2017]. Honan, M. 2013. Remembering the Apple Newtons Prophetic Failure and Lasting Impact. [online] WIRED. Available at: https://www.wired.com/2013/08/remembering-the-apple-newtons-prophetic-failure-and-lasting-ideals/ [Accessed 21 Aug. 2017]. King, A.A. Baatartogtokh, B., 2015. How useful is the theory of disruptive innovation?. MIT Sloan Management Review, 57(1), p.77. Mudambi, R. Swift, T., 2014. Knowing when to leap: Transitioning between exploitative and explorative RD. Strategic Management Journal, 35(1), pp.126-145. Nair, P.B. Leng, Q.A., 2012. The Sweet and Sour Apple: The Case of CEO Strategies at Apple Inc. Vidwat, 5(1), p.21. Panizzi, E. and Vitulli, D., 2012, May. iPhone interface for wireless control of a robot. In Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (pp. 782-783). ACM. Riikonen, A., Smura, T., Kivi, A. Tyli, J., 2013. Diffusion of mobile handset features: Analysis of turning points and stages. Telecommunications Policy, 37(6), pp.563-572. Support.apple.com. 2017. Apple - Support - Technical Specifications. [online] Available at: https://support.apple.com/specs/ [Accessed 21 Aug. 2017].

Design Evaluation for Online Gift Shop User- MyAssignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theDesign Evaluation for Online Gift Shop User. Answer: Design Justification The UI (user interface) design is developed for an online gift shop named Rose Online Gift Shop so that they can represent themselves online. The user interface design has been developed for the ease of customers to place order of gift items available in the shop from their home. The user interface mainly provides an insight into services being offered by the online gift shop so that the users can choose from the variety of products or items being sold by the gift shop. The online gift shop UI design has been prepared by studying the various existing online shops. The designs of the various existing websites in the same business have eventually helped to identify the appropriate design that have to be made for ease of users to access the interface. The evaluation of the existing designs has provided an insight into the proper placing of components so that the users can easily navigate through the gift shop being online. The interface was composed by taking after the models of plan an d convenience determinations. The particular UI design for the interface of the gift shop to be online is selected as it will be easy for the users to use the website to place their order by selecting gift items or products. The design of the interface has been determined as it offers a stylish look and feel for the users so that they are comfortable to use the interface. The design being chosen has functionalities for navigation and has added navigation bar so that the users can move from one place to another without any hassle. The items or the gift products being offered by the gift shop are being provided category wise in the interface design so that the customers can choose according to requirements. User Requirements The interface has been design for fulfillment of the desired objectives as it has each usefulness that has been resolved in the design proposition. The design is direct and easy to use that concentrations out to be a positive viewpoint for attracting customers. Next, the interface being made has been incorporated with a hunt bar so that the customers can without a lot of an extend request from the open things in the gift shop to be online. There is a shopping crate given in the interface arrange not in any manner like a bag for shopping in any physical store so that the customers can incorporate their determination of things and examine for obtaining of various things. The shopping crate encourages the customers to incorporate, adjust or delete things as per the determination of customers before proceeding to clear demand setting system. The interface has been moreover embedded with an assistance page to outfit the customers with chart of some general issues being stood up to while p utting in their demand and how to decide them. There is in like manner another module being executed in the interface for effortlessness of the customers to pay early while presenting their demand. The page for ordering being designed in the User interface demonstrates the overall summary of the purchase and total amount that the users have to pay for their purchase. Design Framework The UI for the gift shop to be online has been arranged considering the specific necessities chosen from configuration suggestion. The arrangement has been made with the ultimate objective that at every movement of using the online gift shop, the customers don't stand up to any inconvenience to present their demand of feel that the webpage or convenient utilization of the online gift shop is eccentric in nature. The interface has been set up in this manner that the customers can without quite a bit of an extend put in their demand for particular things for gifts by either looking or scrutinizing open things. The arrangement has been picked so that the customers can put in their demand by taking after very much requested procedure. The contemplations and thoughts for illustrating the interface has been amassed from various available gift shops being online however the most direct modules from those have been decided for this particular wander. The outline systems for locales have furt hermore been considered to ensure that the interface is being arranged by principles for plan and ease of use. The designing of the user interface in this project has been done by gathering information from the following sources: https://www.hardtofind.com.au/ https://www.latestbuy.com.au/ https://www.thegoodstore.com.au/ Conclusion The evaluation of the UI in context to the Rose gift shop for online presence has helped to understand the principles of designing user interface. The design proposal being developed for the online gift shop was considered while designing the interface for users of the shop so that they can easily place their orders. The design of UI for Rose gift shop has been done with perfection such that it meets the requirements of the users. The design of the user interface is suitable for the determined gift shop for online presence as the contents are placed in a sequential manner so that users can easily browse through the store. Bibliography Banerjee, I., Nguyen, B., Garousi, V., Memon, A. (2013). Graphical user interface (GUI) testing: Systematic mapping and repository.Information and Software Technology,55(10), 1679-1694. Charfi, S., Ezzedine, H., Kolski, C. (2015). RITA: a useR Interface evaluaTion frAmework.J. UCS,21(4), 526-560. Hart, P., Bierwirth, R., Fulk, G., Sazonov, E. (2014, August). The design and evaluation of an activity monitoring user interface for people with stroke. InEngineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 2014 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE(pp. 5908-5911). IEEE. Page, T. (2014). Skeuomorphism or flat design: future directions in mobile device User Interface (UI) design education.International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation,8(2), 130-142. Plaisant, C., Wu, J., Hettinger, A. Z., Powsner, S., Shneiderman, B. (2015). Novel user interface design for medication reconciliation: an evaluation of Twinlist.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, ocu021. Zen, M. (2017).A methodology for assessing aesthetics of a graphical user interface of an information system: visual measures-based automated evaluation(Doctoral dissertation, UCL-Universit Catholique de Louvain).