Grammarly? (The program)

[-K2-]

Has anybody signed up to use the online version?

Grammarly

Grammarly’s free writing app will make sure your messages, documents, and social media posts are clear, mistake-free, and impactful.

www.grammarly.com

How does it compare to the software?

I use the free downloaded version for windows (which I believe actually works online), since I use MS-Word-97 (which is a little, hehe, out of date). Up until perhaps a month ago, it was rather comprehensive and specific. After a software update, it is now more vague, prompting you to buy the upgraded version via 'x-y-z specific issues' still exist (although, in most cases, that forces you to try various grammatical fixes and see if it satisfies/removes the prompt. That results in learning IMO).

I don't care if you're a literary genius or a writin' ignOramoose like me. It's easy enough to try then keep or pitch.

That said, many folks I speak with on a much-less professional writing forum I visit, were impressed enough that they bought it and are all extremely satisfied with the purchase. On the other hand, nothing can account for style or intentional misuses of grammar. So there will always be a point where you need to follow it mindlessly, and your paragraph will read exactly like mine, or, use it to polish 'your style' to the degree 'you' want.

K2

 

[Brian G Turner]

Grammarly comes across as a beta-product that hasn't been properly tested - certainly when it comes to editing fiction.

The main problem is the inability to turn on/off specific rules. Sure, you can select all corrections, or toggle on/off Correctness, Clarity, Engagement, and Delivery - but you can't edit the rules within those.

For example, Correctness is a great way to find and identify typos. However, Correctness always includes an infuriating comma rule that you cannot turn off. And the comma rule flags dominate the corrections. When I've used this I must have gone through something like 20 unnecessary comma flags for every typo I found.

Additionally, it makes suggestions that just don't seem to have been proofed. For example, it will recommend changing instances of "a way" to "away", regardless of context. I wish there was away to turn that off! (typo intended). There are plenty of other examples.

Additionally, the settings aside from Correctness seem pretty irrelevant.

This could be a great tool if users had more control of specific rules, and the suggestions were properly proofed.

As it stands, though, it's of very limited use for editing fiction, and gives the impression of a product that its developers don't even use themselves. Considering the pricing, I would have thought the company would have made more effort with it.

 

[Ogma]

I use Grammarly and ProWritingAid (the desktop versions). One will flag issues that the other misses, but even in combination, they are fallible.
As others said, you need to have a good idea of grammar to use them. Accepting their suggestions without review can send your document in the wrong direction. They can miss glaring errors. Some of their suggestions depend on what you are trying to say and only you know that. Commas in particular can be fun. One of them can encourage you to add a comma only to flag as an error as soon as you accept. I've come across similar issues to "a way/away". Sometimes, they push you to cut too much meat off the bone, making sentences grammatically correct but lifeless. They're not accurate enough for final proofreading for example.

Having said all that, I find them useful as a first pass edit. ProWritingAid allows you to check for repeated sentences and overuse of particular words, for example.

 

[Brian G Turner]

And just in case anyone thinks I don't understand commas, Grammarly wants to turn this sentence:

Along with all the supplies thousands of colonists would need for decades.

with:

Along with all the supplies, thousands of colonists would need for decades

 

[Overread]

Hmm that sounds like a rather grim-dark interpretation of the sentence - you sure you've not got it in Warhammer mode?

That said it does highlight the issue with computer reading in that we are still a very long time off machines understanding contexts and such. They are good for spellings and such which are mostly standard within a body of text no matter context (and contextual changes would likely be repeated through the body of the text so can effortlessly be added to the dictionary or ignore list); but are still a long long way off replacing a human reader.

 

[Fiberglass Cyborg]

The sheer saturation bombing of their YouTube advertising makes me suspicious:- it smacks more of "selling useless tat to people who don't know any better" than "serious professional tool."

 

[Rufus Coppertop]

Grammarly comes across as a beta-product that hasn't been properly tested - certainly when it comes to editing fiction.

The main problem is the inability to turn on/off specific rules. Sure, you can select all corrections, or toggle on/off Correctness, Clarity, Engagement, and Delivery - but you can't edit the rules within those.

For example, Correctness is a great way to find and identify typos. However, Correctness always includes an infuriating comma rule that you cannot turn off. And the comma rule flags dominate the corrections. When I've used this I must have gone through something like 20 unnecessary comma flags for every typo I found.

Additionally, it makes suggestions that just don't seem to have been proofed. For example, it will recommend changing instances of "a way" to "away", regardless of context. I wish there was away to turn that off! (typo intended). There are plenty of other examples.

Additionally, the settings aside from Correctness seem pretty irrelevant.

This could be a great tool if users had more control of specific rules, and the suggestions were properly proofed.

As it stands, though, it's of very limited use for editing fiction, and gives the impression of a product that its developers don't even use themselves. Considering the pricing, I would have thought the company would have made more effort with it.

What else can we expect from people who add an adverbial suffix to a noun and think it's a cute and clever name for their product? Personally, I'd like to see the developers put in the stocks and pelted with month old, dead herrings.

 

[Astro Pen]

On the privacy issue: