Personally, I think it makes sense to be compared/reviewed for a couple of reasons, like:
a. obviously it will show the strengths of PA
b. also for the users who -are- in fact already using PA
(a kind of getting a confirmation that still they made the 'right choice' at the time)
c. most people are checking out these kinds of reviews to see what is around/available, which programs are getting positive editor/user reviews, etc.
this often is the 1st step of trying out software, join the crowd (at least, that's how I proceed)
but above all..
d. it may be benificial from a commercial point of view
(check the number of downloads on cnet, even if only a (very) small percentage results in buying a license)
As an end-user I donot know about this 'affiliate program'-thing. I simply note that PA is missing and I feel a bit sorry for that because I think PA deserves to be among the other programs.
I won't be mentioning any names here, but frankly I am using a few tools that are slowly vanishing from the scene. Similar to PA they hardly ever show up in such lists and/or are reviewed in magazines. One developer indicated that his product, though still maintained fixing possible bugs, will not develop any further: it would require further financial investments and the sales donot permit this. That tool, in my opinion one of the best I know after comparing over dozen during a couple of days, wasn't showing up in any listing/review either...
Am subscribed to three computermagazines, but donot recall PA being reviewed over the last couple of years.
Anyway, I hope to have made my point :-)
p.s. pls donot get offended/irritated or whatever, it was a positively meant suggestion to get PA in such lists.
= btw - this is what is happening when writing a longer reply
