My Software Criteria: What Actually Matters
When I started building AI-powered tools on Make.com, I had to stop romanticizing software and start thinking like an engineer. That changed everything about how I evaluate content creation tools.
Here's what I actually care about:
- API access or webhooks. If I can't integrate it into a workflow, it's manually created busywork dressed up as productivity.
- Cost per output, not cost per month. A $99/month tool that saves me 2 hours is different from one that saves me 20 hours. Do the math.
- Consistency and reliability. I'd rather have something boring and predictable than flashy and flaky. My reputation depends on the output.
- Real feature depth, not feature theater. Most AI content tools are interfaces wrapped around the same OpenAI API. The UX doesn't matter if the underlying model is the same.
- No vendor lock-in. If the company goes down or pricing changes, can I extract my workflows?
This filters out about 95% of what you see on ProductHunt.
ChatGPT vs Claude: Where I Use Each
This is the decision that matters most. Both are incredible, but they're genuinely different tools.
Claude (Anthropic): I use this for long-form writing, like this blog post. Claude handles context better. When I'm writing something with 5+ sections and I need the voice to be consistent, Claude is superior. It also refuses less and follows nuance more carefully. If I ask it to "write this in a Chicago accent without being a caricature," it actually understands that constraint.
The 200k token context window is a game-changer for me. I can dump my entire project brief, previous writing samples, and the last 10 blog posts I wrote, and Claude will nail the style.
ChatGPT (OpenAI): I use this for rapid iteration and coding-adjacent prompts. Need 10 variations of a headline? ChatGPT faster. Need to explain a complex API integration? GPT-4 is better at technical depth. The web version is snappier, and the ecosystem (plugins, integrations, etc.) is more mature.
My honest take: Use Claude for anything long-form where voice matters. Use ChatGPT for quick tasks, code, and when you need faster response times. Don't pay $20/month for both—that's the mistake everyone makes.
Jasper, Copy.ai, and Why I Dropped Them
I paid for Jasper for three months. It's a well-designed interface. The features look impressive on a demo video. And it was useless for what I actually do.
Here's why: Jasper is ChatGPT in a suit. You're paying $39-99/month for a UI on top of OpenAI's API. The "unique prompts" and "templates" are prewritten prompts that you could write yourself in 10 minutes. Once you've seen the pattern, you realize there's no magic.
The same applies to Copy.ai, WriteSonic, and about 15 other tools I tested. They're all the same underlying model with different UIs.
I dropped Jasper because:
- No API access for my own workflows (back then, this might have changed).
- The interface doesn't buy me enough time savings to justify the cost above ChatGPT Pro.
- I couldn't extract my work or prompts easily.
- The "AI templates" are training wheels that actually slow down experienced users.
If you're new to AI writing, Jasper's templates might help you learn the prompt structure. But once you understand the model, you're just paying for the UI. And a good UI is worth something—but not $40+ on top of ChatGPT Pro.
Make.com as the Content Engine
This is where the real work happens for me. Make.com became my orchestration layer for everything else.
Here's a real example from my Blog Post Generator: A user submits a keyword via a form. Make.com triggers a webhook. I make a call to Claude asking for a keyword-clustered outline. Then I trigger a second call asking Claude to write each section. Finally, I format it and email the result back to the user.
That entire workflow costs me about $0.10 per blog post in API calls (Claude's pricing). The Jasper equivalent would cost the user $2-3+ in their monthly subscription amortization.
Make.com's power isn't that it's better at writing—it's that it connects things. I can chain OpenAI calls, add conditional logic, format outputs, integrate with email, Slack, databases, whatever. Once I wire up that system once, it runs reliably and costs pennies.
This is why I recommend Make.com for anyone serious about building with AI. You're not paying for "AI writing" premium features. You're paying for the ability to build custom AI workflows at scale.
Grammarly: The Different Value Prop
Grammarly is not an AI writing tool. It's an AI editing tool. That's why I still pay for it even though I use Claude.
Claude generates prose. It's good. But it's not perfect. Grammarly catches:
- Repetitive phrases I miss because I'm too close to the work.
- Tone consistency issues (did I switch from conversational to formal mid-paragraph?).
- Readability metrics that actually matter for how long people stay engaged.
- Edge-case grammar that spell-check doesn't catch.
I use Grammarly after Claude finishes a draft. Claude writes it, I edit, Grammarly polishes. That three-step process is faster and better than just Claude alone.
The $120/year cost is worth it because it's not replacing anything—it's adding a finishing layer. Unlike Jasper, which tried to replace my entire writing process and failed, Grammarly owns a narrow piece of the workflow and does it well.
Image Generation: Midjourney vs DALL-E
I don't use images every post, but when I do, I have two tools.
Midjourney: Better for stylized, branded images. The quality is higher, consistency is more reliable, and once you dial in a style, you can replicate it. I use it when I need something that looks polished and intentional.
DALL-E 3: Better integration and faster iteration. Since it's bundled with ChatGPT Pro, I don't think about cost. I use it for quick visualizations and when I want something generated in under 30 seconds.
Honest take: Unless you're doing serious visual branding, DALL-E 3 is probably all you need. Midjourney is worth it if you're publishing regularly and want images that look professionally consistent. The $30/month Midjourney subscription adds up, but so does the time saved not iterating on DALL-E prompts.
What I Actually Dropped (And Why)
Beyond Jasper, I've abandoned a lot of "promising" tools:
- Sudowrite: Marketed as "Claude for creative writing." It's actually ChatGPT with a fiction-focused interface. I'd rather use Claude directly.
- Notion AI: Nice when you're already in Notion, but it doesn't buy me anything over Claude in a separate window. Context switching costs more than copy-paste.
- Rytr: Another ChatGPT wrapper with prewritten prompts. Same problem as Jasper, just cheaper.
- QuillBot: Paraphrasing tool that honestly doesn't understand nuance the way Claude does. I'd rather edit manually.
- Every "AI SEO" tool: They promise to automatically optimize for rankings. They actually just stuff keywords back into your text. Hand-written optimization is faster and better.
My Actual Stack (and the Monthly Cost)
Here's what I actually pay for:
- ChatGPT Pro ($20/month): For quick ideation, coding, iteration.
- Claude Pro ($20/month): For deep long-form work and the context window.
- Grammarly Premium ($120/year, ~$10/month): For final editing pass.
- Make.com Pro ($25/month): For workflows and automation.
- Midjourney ($30/month): For when I need branded images.
- API costs (~$50-100/month): Claude and OpenAI API calls when running the generators at scale.
Total: ~$155-205/month.
Compare that to if I bought Jasper ($99), ChatGPT Pro ($20), Grammarly ($10), Make.com Pro ($25), and Midjourney ($30): that's $184/month, and I don't get API access or the flexibility I actually use.
The difference is I own the workflows. If Anthropic raises Claude's price, I can pivot to GPT-4. If Make.com changes pricing, I can export my setup to Zapier. Nothing is betting my entire content process on one vendor's subscription model.
The Honest Verdict
Use the models (Claude and ChatGPT), not the software. Don't pay for someone's UI around an API you can access directly. If you're building content at scale or you want to automate workflows, start with Make.com or Zapier—they cost less and buy you infinitely more flexibility.
The best AI content creation software is the one that costs the least and integrates with your actual workflow. For most people, that's Claude Pro or ChatGPT Pro, plus Make.com if you want automation. Everything else is feature theater.