|
Quant - yes, their price tag is way too high. UR is now the better program and at an extremely reasonable price for what it is. Perhaps UR is too cheap? I would certainly pay more for a program I increasingly "live in". But how to set a proper pricing strategy for UR is a headache I don't envy anyone.
However, pricey though InfoSelect is, and notwithstanding that it is clearly now in decline, it has been for many years one of the gold standards to measure other programs against. If the major added benefits of UR (to my mind cloning, brilliant hoisting, and the ability to pull in and index other types of data far better) can be combined with the ease of use and stability of InfoSelect, then I feel UR may become the leading product of its type. Certainly I hope so.
I think, therefore, it is a good idea to measure UR against InfoSelect (and indeed other programs users have liked).
I also think there is a useful debate to be had about how much of a word processor UR should provide. For me not having to fire up a bloated industry standard word processor every time I want to do some simple text processing is a major benefit of UR or InfoSelect, and I personally welcome as much word processing functionality as the developers feel able to provide. That said, I think the word processing is pretty good in UR already. I just had in mind one simple little feature that I find incredibly useful in InfoSelect which I am sure could be implemented in UR very easily. It is one of those features that seems unimportant until you try to work without it.
But yes, I will get myself a macro program! Which do you recommend?
|