If I may ask, what factors lead you to use the Display CAL/Argyll over the i1 Display Profiler?
I'd like to hear Mouse's reasons too...
But for myself, the number one factor was that at the time I stopped using the OEM software, the OEM was only able to do ~400 patches - whereas the DisplayCAL(name change)/Argyll allows for up to 11,000 - and likely more if you build your own test charts using it's built-in utility for that. Although I tried ~11,000 once, it was still calculating the next day - and VERY slowly, at that - so I aborted it. Now I just do about 6-to-8,000 or so. But even with that number of patches, it still gets through the calculating phase rather quickly.
Another reason would be the sheer number of advanced options possible with it. Even though many are still over my head, it's nice to know that they're there for when I learn more about them.