When comparing tools you can often see what the differences are between home & pro versions, & that can sometimes inform you about what you're thinking about buying, e.g. why you might pay a bit extra for one than another. With video software it doesn't work that way. You can see what Premiere Pro adds that the Elements version's lacking, but you don't see why the full version is harder to use, or why some stuff is done the way it is. Hopefully briefly defining below what pro video software is will help cut through some of the clutter made by Cyberlink's, as well as competitors' ad copy.
It's possible I imagine that Cyberlink did a total & complete redesign & re-write of Power Director for version 14, but as they haven't done that for the 13 versions that came before, it's doubtful. Looking at their page for PD 14 [not so much detail on the giveaway page], cutting through the clutter of misleading claims I thought might be useful. That said, on to Power Director 13 LE...
Power Director is a failure when it comes to output format. I added a codec [UT Video] to my VM where I tested PD, & it won't see it. That limits you [severely] to whatever Cyberlink saw fit to include -- in this LE's case, ancient DV & Windows Media formats. That's a deal breaker, even if it included the other formats offered in the full version, unless PD brought something dramatic to the table & sold for around $20 -- it does neither. If PD's I'll call them premium codecs offered top quality with a full range of settings [which I doubt based on previous PD trials], there will be something newer, better, or special you can use *IF* you can at least output lossless avi, & PD won't let you. If other NLEs in this same class were as restrictive you might say so-be-it, but they're not.
PD offers nothing in the way of editing you won't get in most any low cost NLE. It's not as sophisticated as editors like Nero or any of the versions of Vegas, not as easy to use as a now older version of Roxio NXT I have, nor does it have the range of features & flexibility in the visually very similar VideoStudio Pro. I couldn't test the missing premium codecs this time, but I have in the past, & video output was lower quality than most NLEs, encoders, converters etc.
What I did get installing PD was: "The installation performed the following activity: 20264 files added - 73 files deleted - 59 files updated - 72540 registry entries added - 62 registry entries deleted - 70 registry entries updated", in a win7 32 bit VM. I ran a tool called filmerit to see if PD messed with anything Windows already had in the way of Direct Show &/or other video handling, and it doesn't seem to have had any effect, which is good. [I also verified UT Video was set up properly & restarted win7.] PD did add some older C/C++ runtimes from Microsoft, & I didn't like that the setup files include DX9 setup -- DX files for v.9 & 11 are added in PD's program folder, so *hopefully* it kept them to itself & didn't mess with Windows DX related registry entries. [Unlike many [most?] game devs, those writing video software have an alarming incidence of getting DX wrong, so I shudder when I see them bundle the DX installer.] Running PD it stalled once or twice, & I had to remove the boats.wmv sample because PD would never finish loading it, but that might be attributable to running it in a VM.
I like Cyberlink PowerDVD, but that's the only Cyberlink software I'll install -- nothing else they've released measures up to the competition. My comment on the download page didn't make it [doesn't bother me, but it is why I'm writing this], & in it I said that there are people who do like Cyberlink apps like Power Director, but IMO ONLY because they never looked at what competing apps could do. That or they can't appreciate the quality difference in the video files they produce. To me the output flexibility & quality isn't even close, but that's just me & just my opinion. The takeaway or point I'd make is that if you think you're happy or would be happy with a Cyberlink app other than PowerDVD, Please do yourself a favor & compare it to what else is available.
And if you want to check out something a bit more pro, plus it's free, check out Blackmagic's DaVinci Resolve. As Sony hesitated updating Vegas [before winding up selling it to Magix], Resolve was gaining quite a few pro converts. And if Resolve or some other NLE doesn't look like what you see in PD or maybe some other editor, hopefully the short bit below will explain.
* * *
A non-linear video editor [NLE], first & foremost lets you cut & join video clips. A pro NLE focusses on making that as efficient as possible for a rapid production environment. It will be designed to use the keyboard as much as possible, &/or special keyboards, controls etc., letting you rapidly preview & trim individual clips from longer footage [files], then arange & rearange them, usually on multiple tracks, often with some method producing different Takes, so you can show previews of different sequences to decide which one you [or the boss] wants to keep. As quality cameras have gotten cheaper, many also let you work with footage from more than one, e.g. the interviews you see on TV switching between the host & guest, or video shot of a concert, where several cameras may be spread out around the stage, or sporting events.
With lower end video software a Lot of fuss is made over transitions, but for pro work the simple fade is all that's most often used. Many editors do greenscreen, though how well they do it is open to debate -- the same can be said for many of the FX. Working with colors can be critical, but most lower end editors don't have the features or accuracy that you'd want for more than playing around. Many editors will let you do composite work -- overlaying parts of one video over another, e.g. greenscreen -- but a lot [most?] of that is done elsewhere for pro work. Most can speed video up -- slo-mo should really use high fps cameras -- and they can often zoom or pan, though quality can vary considerably.
Much is sometimes said about input formats, but truth is accepting camera footage is what matters most. Much is often said about 4k... the hardest part of working with HD & 4k is the huge file sizes of the [nearly] uncompressed original video files it's preferred to work with. A pro shop may use special proxy software that allows them to preview & edit smaller files, then applies everything you've done in editing to the full-sized versions after you've gone home. Much is often said about GPU assist &/or rendering... It's a different type of processor that does some certain things faster, & some things better than a CPU, but often one or the other, & not both. The best software uses a carefully selected combination of both, using the GPU Only when it'll help more than hurt by compromising quality. Your output formats & quality go hand in hand with that -- the more flexibility you have the better, & you should demand top quality, whereas speed is something that's nice to have as long as you don't sacrifice the other two. Time is money, but money spent on junk is wasted.