Overall, this is a good draft. You are analyzing the different router models by the same categories, which is good, because it enables effective comparison.
The main thing you should do is remember your audience. Keep in mind that this is explicitly for salespeople. Overly technical information isn't going to be productive for this audience without practical guidance about how put this information into sales practice. This doesn't mean that the information should be "dumbed-down"; it means that the information should be presented in a way that is useful to salespeople (and thus customers). Keep that frame in mind; how does this information help sell routers?
Also, the D-Link model isn't getting the same level of attention as the others. Its analysis is only one page, and its "Software" and "Performance" sections are combined. You want to keep your evaluations as fair as possible, which means equivalent analyses.
Additionally, you need to clarify that there are two separate speed issues here: wired and wireless. 802.3u pertains only to wired connections. 802.11b/g are wireless protocols. (Do these not support draft n? If they're recent they should.) Right now the distinction isn't clear.
Finally, there are a number of stylistic matters to address. This list isn't exhaustive, but it gives you an idea of what I noticed.
Don't double-space. Use 1.5 spacing and indention, or single-spacing and no indention but with a line break between paragraphs.
Footnote numbers go after major punctuation marks, such as periods.
There should be no space between the opening angle bracket and the URL in references.
The should be no period between the date of access and the opening angle bracket in references.
In your introduction, you're not providing "all the specifications," which would be impossible.
Use the serial comma consistently (either always or never).
Be aware of unnecessary paragraph breaks, such as in the "Speed/Standards" section of the introduction.
Consistently use one space after sentences.
The header row of table four has an error.
Overall, this is a good draft. Make sure to structure your draft explicitly for your audience, give equivalent analysis to all three options, and address stylistic concerns.
re: Group 5 White Paper Draft
Overall, this is a good draft. You are analyzing the different router models by the same categories, which is good, because it enables effective comparison.
The main thing you should do is remember your audience. Keep in mind that this is explicitly for salespeople. Overly technical information isn't going to be productive for this audience without practical guidance about how put this information into sales practice. This doesn't mean that the information should be "dumbed-down"; it means that the information should be presented in a way that is useful to salespeople (and thus customers). Keep that frame in mind; how does this information help sell routers?
Also, the D-Link model isn't getting the same level of attention as the others. Its analysis is only one page, and its "Software" and "Performance" sections are combined. You want to keep your evaluations as fair as possible, which means equivalent analyses.
Additionally, you need to clarify that there are two separate speed issues here: wired and wireless. 802.3u pertains only to wired connections. 802.11b/g are wireless protocols. (Do these not support draft n? If they're recent they should.) Right now the distinction isn't clear.
Finally, there are a number of stylistic matters to address. This list isn't exhaustive, but it gives you an idea of what I noticed.
Overall, this is a good draft. Make sure to structure your draft explicitly for your audience, give equivalent analysis to all three options, and address stylistic concerns.