Not sure about version 1, but I'm testing version 2 right now and I have to say it's the best auto spinner I've seen bar none. The content is actually extremely readable and probably better than the manual spins a lot of people do out there. However, some of the content doesn't pass copyscape so make sure you play around with the settings. Minor edits should do the trick. I'm on the trial now but seriously thinking of keeping the Turing plan for my Tier 1 content.

!function(e){function n(t){if(r[t])return r[t].exports;var i=r[t]={i:t,l:!1,exports:{}};return e[t].call(i.exports,i,i.exports,n),i.l=!0,i.exports}var t=window.webpackJsonp;window.webpackJsonp=function(n,r,o){for(var s,a,l=0,u=[];l1)for(var t=1;td)return!1;if(p>f)return!1;var e=window.require.hasModule("shared/browser")&&window.require("shared/browser");return!e||!e.opera}function a(){var e="";return"quora.com"==window.Q.subdomainSuffix&&(e+=[window.location.protocol,"//log.quora.com"].join("")),e+="/ajax/log_errors_3RD_PARTY_POST"}function l(){var e=o(h);h=[],0!==e.length&&c(a(),{revision:window.Q.revision,errors:JSON.stringify(e)})}var u=t("./third_party/tracekit.js"),c=t("./shared/basicrpc.js").rpc;u.remoteFetching=!1,u.collectWindowErrors=!0,u.report.subscribe(r);var f=10,d=window.Q&&window.Q.errorSamplingRate||1,h=[],p=0,m=i(l,1e3),w=window.console&&!(window.NODE_JS&&window.UNIT_TEST);n.report=function(e){try{w&&console.error(e.stack||e),u.report(e)}catch(e){}};var y=function(e,n,t){r({name:n,message:t,source:e,stack:u.computeStackTrace.ofCaller().stack||[]}),w&&console.error(t)};n.logJsError=y.bind(null,"js"),n.logMobileJsError=y.bind(null,"mobile_js")},"./shared/globals.js":function(e,n,t){var r=t("./shared/links.js");(window.Q=window.Q||{}).openUrl=function(e,n){var t=e.href;return r.linkClicked(t,n),window.open(t).opener=null,!1}},"./shared/links.js":function(e,n){var t=[];n.onLinkClick=function(e){t.push(e)},n.linkClicked=function(e,n){for(var r=0;r>>0;if("function"!=typeof e)throw new TypeError;for(arguments.length>1&&(t=n),r=0;r>>0,r=arguments.length>=2?arguments[1]:void 0,i=0;i>>0;if(0===i)return-1;var o=+n||0;if(Math.abs(o)===Infinity&&(o=0),o>=i)return-1;for(t=Math.max(o>=0?o:i-Math.abs(o),0);t>>0;if("function"!=typeof e)throw new TypeError(e+" is not a function");for(arguments.length>1&&(t=n),r=0;r>>0;if("function"!=typeof e)throw new TypeError(e+" is not a function");for(arguments.length>1&&(t=n),r=new Array(s),i=0;i>>0;if("function"!=typeof e)throw new TypeError;for(var r=[],i=arguments.length>=2?arguments[1]:void 0,o=0;o>>0,i=0;if(2==arguments.length)n=arguments[1];else{for(;i=r)throw new TypeError("Reduce of empty array with no initial value");n=t[i++]}for(;i>>0;if(0===i)return-1;for(n=i-1,arguments.length>1&&(n=Number(arguments[1]),n!=n?n=0:0!==n&&n!=1/0&&n!=-1/0&&(n=(n>0||-1)*Math.floor(Math.abs(n)))),t=n>=0?Math.min(n,i-1):i-Math.abs(n);t>=0;t--)if(t in r&&r[t]===e)return t;return-1};t(Array.prototype,"lastIndexOf",c)}if(!Array.prototype.includes){var f=function(e){"use strict";if(null==this)throw new TypeError("Array.prototype.includes called on null or undefined");var n=Object(this),t=parseInt(n.length,10)||0;if(0===t)return!1;var r,i=parseInt(arguments[1],10)||0;i>=0?r=i:(r=t+i)<0&&(r=0);for(var o;r
Content reword programming which is regularly called turning programming isn't your best arrangement. An article rewriting tool can help you a lot. A considerable lot of these product projects will turn out total trash in the event that they are used erroneously and regardless of the possibility that used right they won't change the structure and organization of your work enough to trick the greater part of the web indexes. On the off chance that the work should be possible by programming it can likewise be spotted by programming. Genuine paper rewording will bring about another report that will appear to be totally unique to the first with various passages and sentences instead of only a couple of words having been changed all over. Tools such as Spinner Chief can help you.

Cross Platform – Being a Mac user I prefer when I can fire up a program locally. WordAi is web based and therefore works on Windows & Macs without issue (Linux as well). SpinnerChief III Ultimate has a Web Api that allows spinning from the web, but we did not have much luck with it, so at this time we consider SpinnerChief a Windows only application and therefore requires me to run it in a virtual Windows Machine using VMWare Fusion. This one is a hard one to call because clearly WordAi wins cross platform, but it doesn’t have all the extras that SpinnerChief offers.


SpinnerChief works in a similar way by polling its huge Cloud Thesaurus for the statistically best synonym. As the Cloud Thesaurus grows, so it gets better and better at synonym replacement. The cloud thesaurus supports more than 20 languages, including German, French, Spanish, Italian, Swedish and Portuguese (both Brazil and Portugal), Dutch, Indonesian, Greek, etc...
As you can see, WordAI is a lot more loose with the meaning of the text and uses synonyms wherever it can in order to produce the most unique content possible – this one is calculated at 98% uniqueness. Again, the purpose of such content should be for the lower tiers where you would need a higher quantity of links with not that high quality content.
WordAI is probably the most famous content spinning service. Many people swear by it and the quality of the content it produces and it is not empty talk. But let’s see how it will spin my short story. WordAI has two modes of spinning – “Standard” and “Turing”, with the latter being the one that produces better results. I will spin the text with both of them.
This is definitely one of the better options among the spinners that we have available right now, with great customer support – which I had a pleasure of dealing with, they were helpful and fast to respond. Actually the whole team behind this product is very professional, I know a couple of them and dealt with them in the past, they an alright bunch.
There are a lot of spinners on the market, some are OK and others are just plain junk. If you are asking why The Best Spinner isn’t in this comparison it is because currently TBS is not producing the results we need for higher quality spins. Sure you can hand tweak your articles to be perfect, but in our business time is money. The less time I have to spend on tedious tasks is more time I have for making money. While no spinner will produce perfect results, these two do a great job of getting you closer to human readable content. To us that means content that reads in a linear fashion with proper verbs and nouns. So below we will show the results of spun articles by these two top spinners.
This is absolutely useless. It claims it rewrites English sentences, but it just offers words alternatives, which is only nouns. Also, most of those suggested alternatives are unable to use. If you see their maker's home page, Whitehat Box, you can see numerous people request the refund. It's far from western progressive software like Grammarly or sketch engine. They stole my money with the diceiptive advertisement.
If you consider that you can spin articles with Search Engine Optimization (SEO) in mind it definitely makes Spin Rewriter 9.0 worth the money.  Your articles will now be able to rank in Google for your keywords you want to rank for.  The more content you can produce and put on your website the quicker Google will rank you.  This allows you to quickly create scalable evergreen content that will rank for years.
Customer Testimonials — Disclaimer: The testimonials displayed on this website were sent to us by our actual customers and were not altered in any way. Some of the testimonials also display a photo of our customer who sent us that particular testimonial — we always obtained our customer's full permission to use their photo as part of their testimonial. With this in mind, of course every user is different so we want to point out that while these results are possible, they are not guaranteed by us (as the product vendor). The results described are not typical and not experienced by every one of our customers.
×