Peer Review of Proposals Headings for analysis1) Introduction: The introduction provided good background information. It would be helpful to your reader to clearly state what your problem is. Adobe PS that says there is a problem with the system but what is the problem describe what this problem is.2) Problem: The problem was never clearly stated. 3) Objectives: These are clearly stated and relate to the problem4) Solution: The solution is clearly stated. The solution didnt assure me that you were going to be able to go about implementing this solution. Your solution adds an added cost of hiring someone or taking up someones time to fix the bug. This should be stated. 5) Method: You dont persuade the reader that your solution will work. Talk in detail about how youre going to debug the program. Are you going to do a recall on Adobe computers or youre going to put instruction on how to fix this problem on the web or are you going to only make sure new Adobe computers dont have this problem or are you hiring a IT guy to fix the problem either over the phone or house to house and is fixing the problem for consumers going to be costly?6) Resources: You have one resource tell us that they have come up with nonworking solutions but are their working ones?7) Schedule Might be helpful to give customers a time frame that this will be fixed8) Qualifications I am not persuaded that you are qualify to fix this solution but I think if you describe how youre going to debug the computer this will solve the issue. 9) ManagementN/A10) Costs Time cost and how much its going to cost the costumer to have if fixed need to be added. 11) Conclusion Not added12) Reasoning This is clearly states by saying that you have run into this problem and so have others. Maybe add a site where others have said they have this problem. 13) Prose You clearly state when this problem occers14) Graphics N/A15) Page Design Good layout easy to follow16) Ethics N/A