Could you please check the passage?

As usual I am not sure in my grammar and the style. Does it sound like an English text?

 

CompanyX is a small company with large experience. We are a solid team of dedicated programmers and QA engineers, whose primary concern is using technology to help people build business success.

 

The Company was officially registered in 2001. All of us are high-qualified IT specialists with master’s degree in maths and programming. Every individual in our team has 10+ experience of working in programming sphere.  Our professionals mainly specialize in C/C++, C#, Perl, VB/VB.NET, ASP/ASP.NET, SQL, and RDBMS: MS SQL, Informix, Oracle, MySQL, and MS Access.

We create, maintain, and customize software solutions to facilitate day-to-day real estate, car rental and other business operations. Company X provides professional software development and programming services including Windows Application Development, Unix/Linux Application Development, Web Developement, N-tier Application Development, .Net Development, Software Utilities and Tools, Testing Services, Linux System Administration.

 

Factors which set CompanyX apart from other companies in the industry:

 

Ø      Close interaction with customers

Ø      Orientation towards customers’ satisfaction

Ø      Time-tested skills

Ø      In-depth knowledge of computer technologies

Ø      Quick responsiveness to customers’ needs

Ø      Striving for reducing development costs

Ø      Readiness to master new technologies

 

Many thanks!

If I may, where Clive has: Every individual in our team has 10+ years of experience  working in the programming area.  

I'd like to suggest: Every individual in our team has over ten years of programming experience.  

 

Also, in your bullets, all of them are parallel (nouns: ineraction, orientation, skills, knowledge, responsiveness) except the last two:

Ø      Striving to reduce development costs: The goal of reducing your development cost (makes goal a nouns that parallels the others)

Ø      Ready to master new technologies: Abilty to quickly master new technologies (ability is now the noun). If you prefer, I think readiness to master is okay too, though I always hesitate to disagree with Clive.

Thank you.

1. When you have words like "except" and "including," should we always place a comma before them or is that determined by the rule similar to relative clauses?

2. Also, is it OK  to say a comma before them, rather than "place commas before them"? We could interprete the phrase to mean a comma for each of them? Right?

A comma before them  = A comma before each of them 

3. When you are writing in bullet form, all of the list should manifest parallel structure. Is that a general recommandation or something that should be followed unless it is very, very difficult to comply?  

Is the word in bold OK, can I replace it with the word structures?

Thank you Grammar Geek, I can not agree or disagree with a native speaker. The disagreement on parallel structures is something, which I would never have thought about. For me, this is too language specific and I will never be able to think English, unless I move in english-speaking country some day . But, intuitevely, I think it's better to use one part of speech in every line of my list.  

Thank you very much.

Why can the sentence be "all of the list should manifest parallel structures" and not "all of the list should manifest parallel structure" Are you be able to make that distinction clearly because the contexts the sentences are in show them to be different? Is the usage of those two words are different because they don't mean the same thing in sentences? I think it is a variable noun which we should use it as a singular noun if we refers to it as a specific instance of it and as an uncountable noun if being used in a general sense. How are they different?

parallel structure

parallel structures

I think in most situations, they can be used interchangeably REGARDLESS OF THE CONTEXTS THEY ARE IN.

How about these variable nouns? I used these examples in another post and asserted that they could be used interchangeably in almost any situations regardless of the contexts the sentences are in. If my assertion is not correct according to you, what can I do to learn to discern better? Should I just look at the contexts closer and eventually, if skilled enough, it will help to resolve my dilemma?

I think Goodman said that he needs more context on my inquiries/questions to post responses? OK, is context the only element involved here? Help.

exposed to sufficient and good quality input(s)

repeated exposure(s) using innovative method(s)

(For the phrase two, I think CalifJim said it has to be methods not method and as to the words input and exposure, the words inputs and exposures are possible to be used (I think that is what he said).)