The document discusses reviews of two URLs that provide explanations on how to use car navigation systems. Several reviewers felt that the first URL's explanations were too simple and could be improved by providing more detailed steps. The second URL was praised for dividing its explanations into four clear sections to aid understanding. Some suggested including screenshots or images to better illustrate the steps and making sentences shorter or breaking them into multiple steps for clarity.

1. 1.
In the first URL,it explain a procedure with car navigation.
The explanation is simple every step every procedure.
The author wants a reader to understand how to use car navigation.
In the second URL,when using car navigation, what acts?
It explain any kind of thing with the car navigation.
The author wants a reader to understand what kind of thing car navigation is.
This will be unrelated to the person who begins to use the car navigation system.
2.
In the first URL,I think that some the entries are severe.
Explanation is too simple,I think that it is difficult for the beginner without having moved car
navigation yet.
I think that explanation is enough to read while using it.
In the second URL,I think that the entries is good.
It can explain how a car navigation system works.
The subject divided into 4 for reader to understand more easy.
3.
In the first URL,it explains a procedure when using car navigation.
The details more than it are not included in particular.
In the second URL,it explains about around car navigation system.
There is a GPS satellite of minimum 4 in the outskirts, is necessary so that a car navigation system
works.
If you go another way with the way which it shows,it show a new way suitable for the way.
4.
In the first URL, it is good to step 5, but I felt doubt for step after 6.
Because it illustrated by an extremely short sentence first.
A sentence gets longer in the latter half, must not we divide them into some steps?
I think that there is not the meaning that shortened the sentence of the first half.
In the second URL,I think that there is not the problem.
Because the explanation is enough to understand.
5.
In the first URL,a sentence becomes simple briefly.
There is too much information,what an author want to convey does not come to reader.
In addition, there will be the person who does not want to read long prose.
In the second URL,clause is divided into 4 depending on content.
Collecting up the information in clause,it becomes easy to read.
And it becomes rare that reader is confused.

2. 6.
If error is a meaning called the mistake of the grammar, I think there is not it.
If I spread it and say,I post doubt in the second URL.
I feel so have too much a long sentence.
There was not an end, and there was one place of place that it was hard to know a little.
This is my personal opinion,
If sentence become long,I want you to make it to easy to read without dividing the content into 4.
7.
There are many parts which it is hard to understand only in a sentence,I want to use screen shot of
using car navigation.
I want an image which a reader can understand it immediately to see after having read the sentence.
I put minimum 1 piece image on every one step.
Because I think that reader had better look to understand than you read to understand.
Of course the sentence puts minimum information briefly.
8.
1;
After giving a generous explanation,I move to explanation of each clause.
I think that it is delicate to put four clause suddenly.
I think that the introduction is necessary.
2;
If I do the same thing, I prepare an image with a sentence.
There is a possibility that this HP cannot use an image.
3;
Not only I illustrate by oneself,I will introduce a site related to.
This is how,I can prevent that information is partial.
9. 10.
To say honestly,I cannot listen it at all.
I am weak in listening,it was not expected that I could do it before time.