About Content Creating Software ...

I don't like this kind of software. I get much better results with articles written by freelancers. You can get 200 words article for around $1 today.

I personally don't like softwares like these either. When I first started article marketing, I tried some of them but I would always NOT be completely satisfied with the result simply because the articles could not make the human connection I wanted.

Automatic content generators can't replace a custom written piece by a good copywriter because of the emotion factor. Now I'm not an expert by any means but I like my articles to be able to invoke some sort of emotion that will help either create more interest or close a sale. Custom written articles have worked waaaay better for me than automatically generated ones. And when they work better, you don't need to blast a bazillion half par articles out to reach your customers. Quality not quantity. That being said though, I know a lot of people have found great success in quantity vs quality.

I would very much prefer spending the money to outsource the writing to a good copywriter. Make sure it's a good copywriter though because bad copywriters tend to produce content that is akin to automatic content generators (no emotion factor).

Article/content writing software is popular and effective (yes it can be perfectly readable), saves time etc... B.U.T. I like to hold to the idea that if you're trying to build an online business that is going to last and be highly successful YOU need to be in it - at least the majority of the time. If you write all your stuff yourself then it carries your personality and readers get to know and trust you. That's not really what you were asking, sorry, just had to add my .02.

Hi Robert,

There is spinning and spinning. Best is to write your own material using existing articles for inspiration, then use something like Unique Article Wizard, or a software package that uses the same techniques such as Article Helper Pro.

Read the descriptions to understand the approach, but to summarise it takes three versions you have written of the same article and compiles new ones from the paragraphs you have written. It works. The articles are first rate and YOURS because you have written all the words.

Best regards,

Gren.

This thread will bring out a few people who will tell you their product is the best.

There are free services on the net that might fill your needs, some of those are
hosted for you, but you are at the mercy of the service provider. If they pull the
plug, or their site is down for a reason, you can't use it. It's best to have something
you can host yourself, or is desktop software.

In addition to this, no automated tool is gonna do the job for you, you need a tool
that will allow you to control all aspects of the output. These take time to get to
learn. Some that use curly braces "{}" to wrap the text, making your seed articles
very unreadable after a short while, making it difficult to work with, and error prone
too.

Of course I have my own personal favourite tool, and that is ArtiFact. I am
prejudiced, simply because it is my own tool. I have used it to submit to article
directories in the past with success, including EZA.

HTH

Glenn

I always believe that this kind of software only producing articles for search engines purposes and not to the human eyes.

people who don't "like" content spinning software don't seem to understand the nature of progress, and the fact that most of this stuff is getting better all the time. The latest generation of content spinners / wranglers are pretty darn good. Some even have content creation systems that allow you to manually create a new article by 'clicking' that reads as well as or better than something you might have written yourself, without having to research, or type.

Having said that, as the previous poster says - you want quick content for a blog or a supporting site or something, 100% automation nowadays will do it for you, and you have a range of solutions. But if you want to create an opus magnus for submission to ezines, you still need to do a little bit of work (and having said that, I'm beta-testing something right now that does what unique article whatsit does, but automatically. It has a few bugs, but once again, it takes the massive majority of work off my shoulders, and the quality is as good as anything I could write using my fingers and brain. I get the feeling that the 1 click it takes me to get a new article, on any topic I like, is easily good enough compensation for the 90 seconds it then needs to 'polish' it for release).

These are tools, just like any other. After all, I don't manually spellcheck stuff nowadays either.