No, I totally understand the appeal of RocketLauncher, and I understand that there is a lot more to it. My point of view is from users coming over and asking for specific features in LaunchBox that they are missing. Primarily it has been stuff like archive decompression or getting their metadata to work.
With the direction LaunchBox is going though I do feel like LaunchBox is quickly becoming the alternative to everything. It does most things well or better than other front ends and gets updated quickly. We have plans to make sure LaunchBox starts getting updated even faster too, so even some of the features that most users ask for when they start browsing our forums will be there, then what? If LaunchBox has feature parody, at least for the features our users ask the most for, then why does it make sense to use another layer that is redundant?
Until that point, no I totally understand and get that people have put time in to RocketLauncher, I've put time like they have in to LaunchBox. If they want to keep using RocketLauncher despite the progress made on LaunchBox then I've already stated that I stil think that is totally fine. These are not two pieces of software that compliment each other though, because there is a lot of redundancy. So at the end of the day my thought process was, does LaunchBox do better the features it has in common with RocketLauncher? My answer was wasn't 100% of the time, but yea a majority better. Will Jason be adding in the features most requested by RL users so that they don't have to try and duct tape two pieces of software together? Yes, it's just gonna take some time.