PokerTracker or Poker Office? Opinions NEEDED!

[PocketRuler]

[ QUOTE ]
Well one thing to consider is that you will need to buy PAHud in addition to Poker Tracker. Pokeroffice comes with a HUD (Heads up display). I started with pokeroffice (paid full price) and after about 2 months moved to Poker Tracker. Poker office is more user friendly and easier to get your feet wet on if you are new to using stats (VPIP, CC, TAF, SD%W, ect) to play. Its other perk is that the HUD displays pot odds on the table. That said after about 2 months I switched. PokerTracker + paHud is more powerful (in terms of customization) and runs faster. If you have any specific questions, I would be glad to try and help. Poker office also tends to have more bugs/issues, that can usually be fixed with a quick update.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd have to agree with The_Powers. I have had Poker Office and have recently switched to Poker Tracker. Poker Office is way easier to use. It has a nicer user interface and a HUD. Poker Tracker needs a HUD as one is not supplied. So the initial price works out to approximately the same; however, Poker Office has switched from a set fee to an annual fee so Poker Office will cause you more in the long run. Poker Tracker has a lot more stats but is not as nice to look at. If you can deal with the interface, go with Poker Tracker

[sosorry]

wow I cant beleive poffice went to 79$ per year, that is [censored]. I had planned on buying their software, but not now.

[Nikoms]

Wow. I was just about to get PO - thanks for the heads up on the annual fee vs. one time for PokerTracker. Bad move by PO, IMHO. Your biggest competitor is already cheaper, supports more sights and tracks more stats - and so PO raises the price? Well, any chance PO was going to see my $79, just got mucked.

[Mental]

PO doesn't work with UB. A lot of people have asked PO to do this for a couple of years and now and they just ignore all the requests. In my opinion PO just blows. They have the worst customer support and now they want to charge a subscription fee? What donks.

[tomtemor]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow. I was just about to get PO - thanks for the heads up on the annual fee vs. one time for PokerTracker. Bad move by PO, IMHO. Your biggest competitor is already cheaper, supports more sights and tracks more stats - and so PO raises the price? Well, any chance PO was going to see my $79, just got mucked.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen a couple of users request an annual fee instead of having to pay for new versions, Ie. PO 2. That's probably why they changed it.

[r0eKY]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow. I was just about to get PO - thanks for the heads up on the annual fee vs. one time for PokerTracker. Bad move by PO, IMHO. Your biggest competitor is already cheaper, supports more sights and tracks more stats - and so PO raises the price? Well, any chance PO was going to see my $79, just got mucked.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen a couple of users request an annual fee instead of having to pay for new versions, Ie. PO 2. That's probably why they changed it.

[/ QUOTE ]

"pocket orifice 2" is out + 80 a year

i signed up a week ago a regret it here's why, no response from the administration yet even though I’ve pm post and emailed him. i only seen him make 2 defensive speculative post in his forum

Administrator
Site Admin

1. in this one he claims absolute is merging with ub

http://www.pokq.com/forum/viewtopic....amp;highlight=

"Absolute will most likely be supported in the future, but since Absolute is merging with Ultimate Bet it is very hard at this point to say which client they are going to use, obiosuly we don't want to add support for a client which soon becomes obsolete."

2. in this one he claims bodog is pulling out

http://www.pokq.com/forum/viewtopic....amp;highlight=

"From a technical standpoint I think we would be able to add support for Bodog but it would require some work. Bodog has gained a lot of traffic since the US ban but rumour has it that they might eventually leave US and they will then be a very small site. So at this point I think we would be wise to see what happens with Bodog in the next couple of weeks. We will keep adding more and more sites (with priority to the size of the site) but at the same time we have a lot of exciting features we wish to add as well as staying on top of bugs, so making priority is not always easy. But I do agree that Bodog is definately an interesting alternative."

the owners of "pocket orifice" have made it clear they dont care about online poker they only care about making some easy fast money

nikmos sums it up in his post

[ QUOTE ]
Wow. I was just about to get PO - thanks for the heads up on the annual fee vs. one time for PokerTracker. Bad move by PO, IMHO. Your biggest competitor is already cheaper, supports more sights and tracks more stats - and so PO raises the price? Well, any chance PO was going to see my $79, just got mucked.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Sigurd]

Pokertracker and PAHUD, and it isn't even close. I would be using them, even if it was only for the HUD. 79$ per year is waaaaaay too much when Pokertracker and PAHUD is charging a one time price of roughly the same.

[Kapsylen]

I started out with Poker Office and I haven't had any problems yet.

[ihaveAdream]

I'm a PO user as well and it's been working very good for me so I recommend it for sure. I can't really make any comparisons with PT though since I know very little about it.

[magus]

PO > PT, but PAHUD > everything