5 Generative AI Alternatives to ChatGPT
5 Generative AI Alternatives to ChatGPT
Are you considering generative AI as a means to build content faster and more efficiently? ChatGPT may be the media darling for creating…
Are you considering generative AI as a means to build content faster and more efficiently? ChatGPT may be the media darling for creating new content, but hard-core business users will find the free tool has less than optimal tradeoffs. Several alternatives exist for business creators to generate copy of all forms, including the five generative AI services reviewed in this article.
I investigated five alternatives using a photography article concept. All the reviewed AI tools resolve limited availability, lack of privacy, possible user-owned intellectual property violations, and oft-cited copy snafus. They all reside in the cloud using a managed service model with reoccurring monthly or annual fees. And they all offer private account use, ensuring corporate data stays private behind a firewall.
Here is a deep look at these five generative AI tools and services.
Anyword — https://anyword.com/
This is a great tool for writers who want more control as opposed to entering a prompt and pulling the virtual slot machine to see what kind of output they get. I liked Anyword because it doesn’t presume to drive your content structure, rather it works with you as a writer to fulfill your outline. It helps generate copy based on strategic content inputs by each article section. Anyword is accessible to individual writers for a modest price and offers an enterprise edition, too.
The AI does offer some prompts to help you structure your article, achieve a desired tone, and build related content. The writer works with the engine to build your article. The SEO tool is also useful, helping the writer to understand the chances of their work getting indexed. Purists will be enthused to see a plagiarism check.
Where the tool falls down is subject matter expertise. Though you may prompt the copy generator with strong words and topics, it may come back with some off-topic content. The content also struck me as formulaic and passive. In addition, while it does write to prompted tones, your article will still lack a personal voice. Real writers will rewrite whole sections of content based on stylistic choices.
Alternate review: Droidcrunch — https://droidcrunch.com/anyword-review/
Jasper — https://www.jasper.ai/
Much like ChatGPT, Jasper takes your prompts to produce answers, sourcing the Internet to create its copy. Unlike ChatGPT, Jasper intends its content to produce blogs and other forms of content, from summaries and Amazon product descriptions to simple blog topic ideas and AI prompts for image generators.
I found Jasper’s article generation interesting and useful in a few ways. Basically, it’s a better form of clay than ChatGPT, structured in a manner that’s conducive to further content writing. Jasper found content ideas and themes I had not considered in my prompts, expanding and making my initial concept richer. In that sense, the slot machine was super useful. I think this AI is built for content marketers and writers.
Now for the negatives. The individual user license is expensive when compared to other tools, and you are required to plunk down the credit card for your free trial. No other engine reviewed here required this fee.
The output is negligibly better than ChatGPT, which to be clear, is not good. The copy definitely requires an edit just for style and improvements. Another nitpick, you can edit in Jasper, but does it train the AI outside of the collective training it receives from everyone? Doesn’t look that way.
Alternative review: ZDNet — https://www.zdnet.com/article/best-ai-writer/
Writesonic https://writesonic.com/
Somewhere in between Anyword and Jasper is Writesonic. The AI bot prompts you on a general idea, then keywords, then potential titles and outlines, and finally generates your content. The output was faster and more in-depth than either of those content generators. Other content forms include general writing, e-commerce, social media, website copy, and ads.
Individual writers will find Writesonic to be much more affordable than its competitors. Businesses may get hit with a much higher fee depending on usage.
Perhaps its best-selling point, Writesonic’s research engine or native training data was much richer and more useful than any of the other bots. It dove deeper to produce a longer article that could be trimmed back or extended based on your needs. Even better was a Google docs integration to allow you to edit in your own personal or business cloud.
Like every other content generator, don’t cut and paste. Writesonic needs help. My sample article started seven straight paragraphs with the word AI as the lead. The writing lacks style and personality, so if you intend for the piece to have some pizazz, you’ll need to add that.
Alternate review: Dataconomy https://dataconomy.com/2022/12/what-is-chatsonic-ai-chatgpt-alternative/
Copy.ai — https://www.copy.ai/
Copy.ai is well-named and meets the traditional ad agency concept of a writer, providing paid ads, website copy, videos, social media, email, etc. To keep an apples-to-apples comparison, the blog or article writer was very easy to use. The GUI had great prompts making the Copy.ai tool accessible to just about any user. Pricing was reasonable, too.
The tool’s creative input process (creative brief for advertising-minded people) is straightforward: Blog, outline, talking points for sections, and a first draft to edit. I like that it prompted you from the start that the copy would need an edit, and indeed it did. Tonality-wise the engine did better than any other in matching the tone I wanted.
Unfortunately, that’s where I found copy.ai dropped off. The actual content sourcing was less robust than other platforms and had more inaccuracies. It reminded me of entry-level content by a strong writer that lacked any understanding of an industry. The outline prompts were also weak, requiring additional inputs, to not much gain.
I don’t think article writing is copy.ai’s primary intended use, so the comparison here may not be fair. However, apples-to-apples copy.ai is not tasty.
Alternative review: BizReport https://www.bizreport.com/small-business/ai-writing-software
Draft.co — https://draft.co/
Not sold on stand-alone generative AI? Need a human-in-the-loop? With some of my reviews about text quality, you have good reason to feel that way. Check out Draft.co, one of the first hybrid writer/AI solutions on the market (Fiverr also offers similar services).
Draft.co is a platform I have some familiarity with, including overseeing the development of several articles. It is pricier than all the other platforms, but it does use freelance writers to guide its AI tools.
The more extensive creative brief and ability to send the writer/editor feedback generates a much stronger product. Most generative AI copy needs to be rewritten to a great extent, while Draft.co usually just needs customization to meet the author’s voice.
Some negatives include higher costs. In addition, those who expect near real-time copy from generative AI-only solutions will find the one to a few-day turnaround slow, a cost of keeping a human-in-the-loop. In some ways, Draft.co still misses, the output is only as good as the writer assigned to your project.
Still, Draft.co will get you closer to “done” than the other four products. You do get what you pay for.
Alternative review (under Draft.co’s old ContentFly name): Writing Studio — ContentFly: Reviews, Pricing, and Alternatives (writingstudio.com)
Conclusion
Generative AI solutions for content creators are still early in their lifecycle. While they have reached a baseline level to become a useful part of writing, there are several tradeoffs. Look at them as foundational research tools to assist your writing. However, we are still generations away from a masterful stand-alone AI solution accessible to all.
Try all of them until you find the one that best matches your business needs and enjoy the benefits of faster idea and content generation. But keep a human in the loop.