Hewlett-Packard Swot Analysis Essay Example for Free

Hewlett-Packard Swot Analysis Essay Hewlett-Packard Company or HP is an American multinational hardware and software corporation headquartered in Palo Alto, California, United States. (from Wikipedia) And HP product lines include personal computing devices, enterprise servers, related storage devices, printers and imaging products. At the same time, HP markets products to household, small- and medium-sized businesses and large enterprises. HP’s mission statement is that to provide product, services and solution of highest quality and deliver more value to our customers that earn their respect and loyalty. We can see that HP really concern about consumers’ satisfactions from their mission. On Fortune 500, HP ranks 10 in 2012 and ranked 11 in 2011. SWOT analysis tool provides a structure for analyzing the internal strengths and weaknesses of an organization, any external opportunities and threats it faces. Band name can be a strength for HP which will make people think good quality. Also , HP provides wide range of innovative products which attract many people to use their products. And HP don’t use other companies’ technologies, they develop their own hardware and software. It can benefit HP because HP will be not limited by other companies. At the same time, HP’s sales are very high. They use different kinds of ways to promote products, like web technology, advertisement and so on. In financial part, HP has robust financials which contains low debt. In addition, HP also has weaknesses. The first one is that no aggressive investment in research and development. No innovative technology and products will be developed. As a hardware and software corporation, HP must increase the investment in RD to keep pace with the development of technology. No good people retention policies and weak controls are taken by HP. Only with good managers, technicists and workers can a company succeed. The external environment consists of opportunities and threats. Firstly, we discuss the opportunities. With the development of the economy, HP has expended their retailed stores for customer convenience. Customers have easier access to the HP product. Also, the software and hardware of computer and cell phone are very popular and are developed quickly. The threats are very huge because many competitors are appearing, such as Dell, Lenovo and Acer. The competitor’s technology and pricing force HP to innovate their technologies and to take many measures to low price. HP also has less coverage than competitor and low compatibility with non-HP product..

Religion and the State in the US

Religion and the State in the US The separation of church and state in the United States Religion in the United States Religious belief among Americans today is as vigorous, dynamic and widespread as it ever has been. Immigration constantly brings new and different religious traditions and practices to the United States, even as the Christian traditions to which most Americans adhere continue to adapt to the needs of an ever-changing population. Approximately ninety percent of Americans profess a belief in God, and religion remains a pervasive influence on American culture, politics and public policy. No Established State Religion: The separation of church and state Yet the United States is among the few nations in the world that eschew an established state religion-indeed it was the first to do so, in 1791. As a result, the government is prohibited from supporting or endorsing any religion, or promoting one at the expense of another. Among other things, this means it cannot appoint religious leaders, compel worship or prayer, provide official interpretations of sacred scriptures, or define creedal statements of faith. Although this arrangement is widely known in the United States as the separation of church and state, owing to the predominance of Christian churches, it also applies to mosques, synagogues, and indeed all religious institutions of any sort. Scholars often use the term disestablishment to specify the legal aspect of the concept, but by whatever name it is a core principle and defining feature of American political life. The Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776: Representatives of 13 British colonies in North America published the Declaration of Independence, an open letter to the world stating their reasons for breaking the American ties of allegiance to King George V, written primarily by Thomas Jefferson: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. What does this mean? The Declaration argued that human rights were given by God, but that they must be protected by a government whose powers are derived from the consent of the governed, not from royal lineage or divine sanction. In its entirety, the declaration did not offer a detailed theory of church and state, much less codify it into law, but these passages do imply a certain view of the relationship between religion and government. According to this document: God is to be acknowledged as the creator of humankind and source of inalienable rights. Government is properly understood as a human, not divine, institution whose authority and power is derived from citizens themselves, not from God. This concept is known as popular sovereignty, which President Abraham Lincoln would famously describe nearly a hundred years later as Government of the people, by the people and for the people. The Declaration of Independence is highly esteemed in American culture not merely as the document that marked the United States independence as a nation, but also as a succinct statement of the founding values of this country. Bill of Rights December 15, 1791: This became part of the United States Constitution. It gave American citizens the most extensive guarantees of liberty the world had ever seen. If the Declaration of Independence signaled the founding of the new nation upon grand ideals of freedom, the Bill of Rights gave power to that promise. It guaranteed the rights to religious freedom, free speech and free association; protections against self-incrimination and unlawful search and seizure; guarantees of public trial, legal counsel and the due process of law; and the extraordinary recognition that citizens have many other powers and rights not enumerated in the Constitution. First right in the bill: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Challenges to the freedom of religion The right to the free exercise of religion is not absolute, at least as it applies to religious practices. While American citizens enjoy the absolute liberty of conscience (meaning that they are legally entitled to believe or reject any idea, religious or otherwise, that they encounter), it would be impossible for them to have equal rights to act upon those ideas without being subject to some sort of regulation. Some of these actions would conflict with the goals or actions of others, and the freedom of one or the other person would therefore be restricted. Thus in principle the laws and regulations protecting the free exercise of religion are intended to grant an individual the most expansive set of liberties compatible with the same liberties granted to all others. Conclusion The separation of church and state, and the freedom of conscience it is intended to protect, are widely embraced core principles of the American form of liberal democracy. Church-state separation is at once simple in concept and irredeemably complex in practice. In a sense the aspiration for legal neutrality vis-Ã  -vis religion is doomed to failure because the concept of disestablishment itself rests upon a distinctively Protestant Christian understanding of religion as something that can be equated with faith, then privatized and separated from other parts of life. But in another sense, the lively experiment of religious liberty in the United States has been an extraordinary success, and not just for Protestants: thousands of different religious groups now make up the American religious landscape. Religion in the United States The religious landscape in the United States is shifting rapidly. We used to be a nation where most people identified themselves as Christian; today there are not only more Christian sects, but also growing numbers of people who belong to other faith traditions, and growing numbers who are not affiliated with any religion or are not believers. According to the national surveys, religious affiliation in the United States is both very diverse and extremely fluid. United States public is becoming less religion A study by the Pew Research Center made in 2014 compared data to 2007: The share of U.S. adults who say they believe in God declined from approximately 92% to 89%. The share of Americans who say they are absolutely certain God exists has dropped more sharply, from 71% in 2007 to 63% in 2014. The falloff in traditional religious beliefs and practices coincides with changes in the religious composition of the U.S. public. A growing share of Americans are religiously unaffiliated, including some who self-identify as atheists or agnostics as well as many who describe their religion as nothing in particular. Altogether, the religiously unaffiliated (also called the nones) now account for 23% of the adult population, up from 16% in 2007. Mixed religious backgrounds on the rise About one-in-five U.S. adults were raised with a mixed religious background, according to a new Pew Research Center study. This includes about one-in-ten who say they were raised by two people, both of whom were religiously affiliated but with different religions, such as a Protestant mother and a Catholic father, or a Jewish mother and a Protestant stepfather. An additional 12% say they were raised by one person who was religiously affiliated (e.g., with Protestantism, Catholicism, Judaism or another religion) and another person who was religiously unaffiliated (atheist, agnostic or nothing in particular). Still the exception To be sure, religiously mixed backgrounds remain the exception in America. Eight-in-ten U.S. adults say they were raised within a single religion, including two-thirds who say they were raised by two people who shared the same religion (or both of whom were religiously unaffiliated). An additional 14% who say they were raised by a single parent. But the number of Americans raised in interfaith homes appears to be growing. Fully one-quarter of young adults in the Millennial generation (27%) say they were raised in a religiously mixed family. Fewer Generation Xers (20%), Baby Boomers (19%) and adults from the Silent and Greatest generations (13%) say they were raised in such a household. Religious nones Americans are most likely to identify in adulthood as religiously unaffiliated if they were raised exclusively by a parent or parents who were unaffiliated themselves. Indeed, among adults who say they were raised either by a single parent who had no religion or by two people who were both religious nones, a solid majority (62%) identify as nones today. But there also are many nones who come from religiously mixed backgrounds. Nearly four-in-ten of those who say they had one parent who identified with a religion and another parent who was religiously unaffiliated describe themselves as nones today (38%). And one-quarter of those raised by a Protestant and a Catholic are now religiously unaffiliated (26%). One-in-five people who were raised exclusively by Catholics are religious nones today, as are 14% of those who say they were raised solely by Protestants. Catholics Most people raised solely by Catholics (62%) continue to identify as Catholics in adulthood, which is on par with the share of those raised solely by nones who remain religiously unaffiliated today. But those raised by one Catholic parent and one non-Catholic parent have less than a 50-50 chance of identifying with Catholicism as adults. Among U.S. adults from a mixed Protestant/Catholic background, for example, just 29% identify as Catholics today, while 38% are Protestants and 26% are nones. Protestants Eight-in-ten people raised exclusively within Protestantism continue to identify as Protestants today. And 56% of those raised by a Protestant parent and a religiously unaffiliated parent now identify as Protestants. Mother knows best Most Americans who were raised by a biological or adoptive mother and father say their parents played an equal role in their religious upbringing. But among the roughly four-in-ten adults who say one of their parents (either biological or adoptive) was more responsible for their religious upbringing, far more name their mother than their father. Moms seem to have been especially influential in the religious upbringing of people from interfaith families. Nearly half (46%) of those raised by parents affiliated with two different religions say their mother was primarily responsible for their religious upbringing, while just 7% say their father took primary responsibility; the rest say both parents played equally important roles in their religious upbringing (41%) or give some other answer, such as that they were not raised in any religion (3%).

The Role of Culture in Shaping us as Individuals :: Sociology Essays

The Role of Culture in Shaping us as Individuals Culture has a big impact on how we all fit in as individuals in today’s society, and since this assignment is about that I decided to include some of my own experiences to illustrate my point of view and compare it with those of my classmates and some of the readings. My family and I moved to United States in 1998 from Albania. My parents believed that I and my sister would get a better education here and also it would be useful and interesting to learn another language and its culture. Considering I didn’t speak a word of English I was very scared about starting high school. I was scared about fitting in with the other kids, I was scared about not being able to understand them, and not sure how my culture would impact the way how I looked at things. I remember my first day at the bus stop, when this very handsome guy approached me and said â€Å"Good morning, you must be new†¦What’s Up?† At that momement I kept looking up thinking†¦Ã¢â‚¬ Gosh I don’t really see anything up there†¦what is he referring to?† His name was Michael and he kept repeating the phrase â€Å"What’s up† thinking maybe I didn’t hear him. All I remember is turning red in my face and using the same phrase I had told myself many times that I was never going to use†¦ â€Å"I don’t speak English.† When we moved here I told myself I was going to try my best however I wasn’t going to be like another one of those foreigners you see in the movies that move to a different country and make no attempt to learn the language. I also told my self that I was going to repeat every word that I heard in my brain and then later using the dictionary to find out what that word meant. My favorite subject in highs cool was math, since it required little English knowledge and my least favorite subject was Physical Education. I would have never thought that I was going to hate Physical Education because usually that’s a class most students would probably like to take again and again.

Examine the development and effects of the relationship between Pip Ess

Examine the development and effects of the relationship between Pip and Estella Pip and Estella's story is not about living happily ever after. Dickens never tells us what happens, if anything, between them in the end. He leaves it only that they remain friends. There is a purpose for this. Dickens novel is about Pip's quest for Estella's love and what he is willing to do to gain it. I think that the story is never about the love itself. We can see this because in the majority of the story, Estella is only present in Pip's heart and thoughts. The actual interaction between the characters Dickens keeps at a minimum. To make this a love story, the characters would have to carry out some sort of loving affection towards each other, which they don't do, although I do believe that Pip loves Estella but she thinks it is impossible that she will ever love, and so does not ever like the idea of Pip's affection; as a friend she repeatedly warns him off. I think that most of us regard a woman without feeling, who torments others, with disapproval, but it is not Estella's faul... Examine the development and effects of the relationship between Pip Ess Examine the development and effects of the relationship between Pip and Estella Pip and Estella's story is not about living happily ever after. Dickens never tells us what happens, if anything, between them in the end. He leaves it only that they remain friends. There is a purpose for this. Dickens novel is about Pip's quest for Estella's love and what he is willing to do to gain it. I think that the story is never about the love itself. We can see this because in the majority of the story, Estella is only present in Pip's heart and thoughts. The actual interaction between the characters Dickens keeps at a minimum. To make this a love story, the characters would have to carry out some sort of loving affection towards each other, which they don't do, although I do believe that Pip loves Estella but she thinks it is impossible that she will ever love, and so does not ever like the idea of Pip's affection; as a friend she repeatedly warns him off. I think that most of us regard a woman without feeling, who torments others, with disapproval, but it is not Estella's faul...

A Sample and Critique of psi Research :: Telepathy Precognition Psychic Papers

"Do you remember how electrical currents and 'unseen waves' were laughed at? The knowledge about man is still in its infancy." - Albert Einstein Introduction Perception of future events (precognition), communication through thoughts (telepathy), material manipulation without physical contact (telekinesis), sight of an object or place millions of miles away with enough accuracy to draw it (remote viewing) – these are a few cases of what is referred to as "psi phenomena," also known as parapsychological or psychic phenomena. "Psi" refers to "anomalous processes of energy or information transfer... that are currently unexplained in terms of known physical or biological mechanisms."(1) Long dismissed by scientists and other skeptics all over the world, these occurrences are often attributed to trickery, hallucination, lying, chance, and even spiritual influence. Claims of psychic ability come from many varied sources. From the friend who has premonitory dreams and the dog who knows when the master has decided to come home, to the glamorous astrologer with a 900-number and the clairvoyant with a TV show, stories of paranormal abilities range from personal and thought-provoking to distant and Hollywood-esque. Are these things really possible? What does the scientific community actually know about these phenomena? Ultimately, one must ask the question, what can the scientific community know about these phenomena? This paper is intended to provide a small sample and critique of the available scientific research on these unexplained and often dismissed phenomena. The examples which form this review are: research on unexplained phenomena not associated with "psychic" individuals, large-scale research centering on many individuals with "psychic talent," and an investigation of the claimed abilities of a single internationally celebrated "psychic." Despite the historical and prevalent stigma and sensationalization associated with this field, many respected educational establishments have laboratories involved in the research of psi. The Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research program, instituted in 1979 to investigate mind-matter interactions (2); the Parapsychological Association, a 1957 offshoot of the Duke Laboratory (3); the Koestler Parapsychology Unit at the University of Edinburgh (4); and Stanford University's 1946 endeavor, Stanford Research Institute are four of these. It should be noted that Stanford Research Institute separated from the university in 1970, and became SRI International. (5) Examples Impersonal phenomena If a person is asked to identify the color of a rectangle, and is subsequently asked to read a randomly generated color name, it is well-known that a matching color name will be called out faster than a mismatching color name.

Tobacco Smoking and Legal Marijuana

Marijuana vs  cigarettes See also: Smoking Marijuana does not cause lung cancer Top anti drug researcher changes his mind: says legalize marijuana Marijuana and your lungs: recent studies Pot is not like tobacco The Effects of Marijuana Smoke There are many reasons why marijuana is  not  worse for you than smoking cigarettes. You may have heard that â€Å"one joint is equal to ten cigarettes† but this is exaggerated and misleading. Marijuana does contain more tar than tobacco — but low tar cigarettes cause just as much cancer, so what is that supposed to mean? Scientists have hown that smoking any plant is bad for your lungs, because it increases the number of ‘lesions’ in your small airways. This usually does not threaten your life, but there is a chance it will lead to infections. Marijuana users who are worried about this can find less harmful ways of taking marijuana like eating or vaporizing. (Be careful – marijuana is safe to eat — but tobacco is not, you might overdose! )  Marijuana does not cause cancer  the way tobacco does, though. Here is a list of interesting facts about marijuana smoking and tobacco smoking: o Marijuana smokers generally don’t chain smoke, nd so they smoke less. (Marijuana is not physically addictive like tobacco. ) The more potent marijuana is, the less a smoker will use at a time. o Tobacco contains nicotine, and marijuana doesn’t. Nicotine may harden the arteries and may be responsible for much of the heart disease caused by tobacco. New research has found that it may also cause a lot of the cancer in tobacco smokers and people who live or work where tobacco is smoked. This is because it breaks down into a cancer causing chemical called `N Nitrosamine’ when it is burned (and maybe even while it is inside the body as well. o Marijuana contains THC. THC is a bronchial dilator, which means it works like a cough drop and opens up your lungs, which aids clearance of smoke and dirt. Nicotine does just the opposite; it makes your lungs bunch up and makes it harder to cough anything up. o There are benefits from marijuana (besides bronchial dilation) that you don’t get from tobacco. Mainly, marijuana makes you relax, which improves your health and well-being. o  Scientists do not really know what it is that causes malignant lung cancer in tobacco. Many think it may be a substance known as Lead 210.Of course, there are many other theories as to what does cause cancer, but if this is true, it is easy to see why  no case of lung cancer resulting from marijuana use alone has ever been documented, because tobacco contains much more of this substance than marijuana. o Marijuana laws make it harder to use marijuana without damaging your body. Water-pipes are illegal in many states. Filtered cigarettes, vaporizers, and inhalers have to be mass produced, which is hard to arrange `underground. ’ People don’t eat marijuana often because you need more to get as high that way, nd it isn’t cheap or easy to get (which is the reason why some people will stoop to smoking leaves. ) This may sound funny to you — but  the more legal marijuana gets, the safer it is. It is pretty obvious to users that marijuana prohibition laws are not â€Å"for their own good. † In addition to the above, legal marijuana would be clean and free from adulterants. Some people add other drugs to marijuana before they sell it. Some people spray room freshener on it or soak in in chemicals like formaldehyde! A lot of the marijuana is grown outdoors, where it may be sprayed with esticides or contaminated with dangerous fungi. If the government really cared about our health, they would form an agency which would make sure only quality marijuana was sold. This would be cheaper than keeping it illegal, and it would keep people from getting hurt and going to the emergency room. (source) FACT: Studies have shown that smoki ng marijuana does NOT increase your chance of getting cancer and may even lower it slightly! Of course, vaping or eating cannabis are still considered the safest methods of ingestion especially for daily consumers. Early on, when our research appeared as if there would be a negative impact on lung health, I was opposed to legalization because I thought it would lead to increased use and that would lead to increased health effects,† Tashkin says. â€Å"But at this point, I’d be in favor of legalization. Tobacco smoking causes far more harm. And in terms of an intoxicant, alcohol causes far more harm. UCLA’s Tashkin studied heavy marijuana smokers to determine whether the use led to increased risk of lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or COPD.He hypothesized that there would be a definitive link between cancer and marijuana smoking, but the results proved otherwise. â€Å"What we found instead was no association and even a suggestion of some p rotective effect,† says Tashkin, whose research was the largest case-control study ever conducted. Listen to Tashkin’s full video  here UPDATE Source  A new study, published in this month’s  Journal of the American Medical Association, tested the lung function of over 5,000 young adults between 18 and 30.After 20 years of testing, researchers found some buzzworthy results:  regular marijuana smokers (defined by up to a joint a day for seven years) had no discernible impairment in lung activity from non-smokers. In fact, researchers were surprised to find marijuana smokers performed slightly better than both smokers and non-smokers on the lung performance test. Why? The most likely explanation seems to be that the act of inhaling marijuana—holding each puff in for as long as possible—is a lot like a pulmonary function test, giving marijuana smokers an edge over their igarette smoking counterparts. For most of human existence, cannabis has bee n considered a medicine. Queen Victoria used it to alleviate her menstrual cramps. Extracts were prescribed by doctors and available at every pharmacy in the U. S. According to  Fast Food Nation  author Eric Schlosser, attitudes toward cannabis only shifted when Americans began to notice and object to its use by immigrants around the turn of the 20th century. More  here

The Beginnings of Industrialization

The Beginnings of Industrialization A. Perceiving Cause and Effect: As you read this section, make notes in the chart to explain how each factor listed contributed to an Industrial Revolution in Great Britain Factor Contribution to the Industrial Revolution 1 . Agricultural Revolution- boosted demand for products and provided labor led to an increase of population increased Food supplies. 2. Abundant Natural Resources- Surplus of natural resources such as coal, ore harbors and ports. 3.Political Stability- allowed Britain to devote its energy and resources to the economic expansion. 4. Factors of Production- Britain had most the resources to produce products. 5. Technological advances- had improved the quality and speed of cloth production Higher profits. 6. Entrepreneurs- they had provided organization skills and took financial risk in creating a business. 7. Building of factories- allowed the industry to move in and out of the home into a main location. 8. Railroad boom- gave an in expensive solution to transport materials created new jobs. B.Enclosure: the enclosure of the agriculture produce to contain u rope rotation: the rotation Of crops to industrial industry Explain how both paved the way for an agricultural revolution. Both of these paved the way for agricultural revolution by the growth of the crops and the enclosure that the agriculture needs C. Define the following terms: Industrial Revolution- the revolution for agriculture use. Industrialization- the change of agriculture to man made products. Factors of production- factory, place, time, management Factory- a place that produces or builds products for a profit Entrepreneur- a type of business person.