GRAMMARLY REVIEW

After comprehensively checking this feature, I found out that Grammarly correctly identifies obvious flaws in spellings. Some examples are "cource" instead of "source" and "riting" instead of "writing". However, where it got confused was in the use of it's and its. It did detect this error, but while it highlighted the incorrect use of ‘it’s’ in the final sentence, it suggested ‘it has’ rather than ‘its’ which was not correct considering contextual spellings.

One of the most common and major grammatical mistake writers make is of the comma splice. I checked this feature by various sentences so I would use a sentence example to evaluate this feature. Example: "My mother told me that she remembered her teachers, Susan and Maria, she could tell you how their voices sounded when they was happy?"     Now this sentence contains a mixture of very definite and complex errors. Common errors in this sentence that Grammarly detected easily are a comma splice (. . . Maria, she . . .), use of the wrong tense of the verb “tell,” and an instance of subject-verb disagreement with (they was). Grammarly gave correct recommendations for replacing comma splice by semicolon or adding an "and" after the comma or replacing the comma with a period and capitalizing the word "she". Similarly, Grammarly in the morning replacing "told" with "be told" or "tell" and replacement of "was" by "were".
However, on the contrary, the place where Grammarly failed to satisfy is the detection of the question mark error at the end of the sentence. Moreover, at some other stances, I found out that Grammarly got confused in placing a comma in a list of words. It got confused in a list of names, things and suggested commas even if there were only two persons or things involved in a list.

Let's again use some examples to test this feature because short examples are helpful to qualitatively evaluate. The example of a short sentence is: "Having done the computer homework, the movie cast would begin". Evaluating this sentence, Grammarly correctly identified the error of a dangling modifier i.e. "Having done the computer work" doesn't relate to "movie cast." However, in this case, Grammarly did not offer any recommendation and just asked to consider rewriting this to avoid the error.
Moreover, the use of full stop should be before or after speech marks. This question will be a source of confusion for many of my readers I believe, but the rule is: In American English, the full stop is placed inside the quotation marks and in British English, vice versa. However, Grammarly failed to identify this error based on American or British English, and it allowed both options without pointing out the confusion.
The next instance to check Grammarly was comparison error checking. Take the sentence: "Maria's grades were better." Grammarly correctly pointed out the comparison error in this sentence and stated "better than whom" with a missing comparison object or person.
Now I checked if it catches wordiness, incomplete sentences and unimpressive sentence structural flow and Grammarly caught it with a sharp eye. I am not mentioning the whole of the long paragraph which contained wordiness in a lot of aspects but just evaluating honestly what Grammarly caught greatly by a small example: "Had a breakfast in the morning." Grammarly impressively pointed out two major mistakes in this sentence. First is the incomplete sentence structure about (who?) had the breakfast. Second is the wordiness issue i.e. breakfast is presumably in morning, so there is no need to write "breakfast in the morning".

Let me first clarify that a software's ability to distinguish and identify British vs American spellings consistency is not the whole story. A good proofreading software must also detect American vs British consistency in style of writing in a sentence or a paragraph or perhaps an entire article or blog post. Let's again use some short sentence examples:
1) The flock were flying.
2) John had a nap.
3) I will go there at the weekend.
4) This sentence is different to the last one.
5) I liked the flavour and colour of it.
Let us first jot down the British/American English confusions these sentences contain:
1) "were" with "flock" - correct in British
2) "had" a nap - correct in British
3) "at" the weekend - correct in British
4) "to" the last one - correct in British
5) "flavour" and "colour" are British spellings

Now having chosen American English in my Grammarly preferences on my dashboard window, Grammarly pointed out only a few inconsistencies:
1) "were" with flock is incorrect
2) spellings of colour and flavour
This is a point where I doubt the claims made by Grammarly to a great extent. As you can see, the examples contained no complex American/British English inconsistencies and therefore, if Grammarly claims to check whole articles or essays for inconsistencies, it may be an exaggeration in comparison to failure to identify American/British errors in simple and short sentences.

Keep the following claim of Grammarly in view before reading my evaluation of this feature:
"Our plagiarism feature compares your content against a library of over 8 billion web pages, so you'll never have to worry about unintentionally borrowing content."
Having said this, I was skeptical of such a claim and decided to scrutinize this to a great depth to measure value vs price of this software.
I started by copying a long paragraph of an article from www.economist.com and amazingly, Grammarly detected the content to be 100% plagiarized. Following this, I used some excerpts from less-commonly known websites and Grammarly impressed by detecting all plagiarism yet again. However, the darker side came when I changed just a few words in the same copied paragraph and Grammarly then resulted in giving a 0% plagiarism report. I did not expect this in a rather expensive virtual proofreader and plagiarism checker in comparison to its peers like Ginger software at just $89.88/annum.The purpose of all these individual checks was solely to aid my readers to make a right choice. Hard earned money should be spent wisely, and for that, everyone needs a first-hand and honest review.
Therefore, the following evaluations can be conclusively made:
--> Realistically, Grammarly can solve 65%-70% of overall writing errors.
--> Plagiarism checker is good but not artificially intelligent to detect deep plagiarism.

Now: All of the above-mentioned pros and cons were to make a balance of qualities and flaws for each respective feature claimed. Now let me highlight some general software flaws that you must keep in mind before making a decision:

• Grammarly can only handle documents up to 65 pages at most
• Only works online
• The WordPress integration often messes up if complicated themes are involved
• Occasionally gets caught in a loop and recommends a change and then reversing it over and over again

But what is great about Grammarly is the Money Back Guarantee of 7 days. Thus, if you are buying Grammarly for the first time and if you are not impressed by what you get in first seven days, then without any inquiries, the money is fully refunded.