| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] | What CAT software do you find more useful ? Thread poster: Michaël Sobol (X)
|
|---|
Uldis Liepkalns 
Latvia
Local time: 01:26
Member (2003)
English to Latvian
+ ...
| AFAIK, Wordfast is fully compatible with Trados | Nov 16, 2005 |
Hmmm... I actually can not distinguish clean/unclean Wordfast files from Trados ones (and neither can my clients), many a time we have done the job in Wordfast (e.g., when highly specialized translator just don't have requested Trados, but has Wordfast) and told the client it was done in Trados. There never has been any problems.
I don't remember much about Wordfast myself (last time I used it was some 3 years ago), but, as far as I remember, it has option "save as Trados (compatible?)" or... See more Hmmm... I actually can not distinguish clean/unclean Wordfast files from Trados ones (and neither can my clients), many a time we have done the job in Wordfast (e.g., when highly specialized translator just don't have requested Trados, but has Wordfast) and told the client it was done in Trados. There never has been any problems.
I don't remember much about Wordfast myself (last time I used it was some 3 years ago), but, as far as I remember, it has option "save as Trados (compatible?)" or like.
Am I missing something?
Uldis
lanave wrote:
I use Wordfast and I consider it a good tool, easy to use.
(snip)
it often happens that they don't assign me any translation job and the reason is I do not have Trados.
Why?
▲ Collapse
| | | | Michaël Sobol (X)
Poland
Local time: 00:26
French
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Thank you still comments though! | Nov 16, 2005 |
Thank you for all your comments.
I am trying to get some useful informations of it to structure my paper.
I still have some questions :
1- What about terminology management?
(As far as I am concerned, multiterm is the best tool)
2- TM updating?
(As far as I am concerned, SDLX and DéjàVu are more user-friendly)
3- Research criteria? Which software do you find more intuitive on that part?
4- Compatibility between different softwares... See more Thank you for all your comments.
I am trying to get some useful informations of it to structure my paper.
I still have some questions :
1- What about terminology management?
(As far as I am concerned, multiterm is the best tool)
2- TM updating?
(As far as I am concerned, SDLX and DéjàVu are more user-friendly)
3- Research criteria? Which software do you find more intuitive on that part?
4- Compatibility between different softwares?
5- Do you often use word alignement ? Which software do you use for it?
6- Any experiences in those softwares?
Across
AppleTrans
BridgeTerm ProMemoria
Cypresof Trans Suite 2000
ForeignDesk
Heartsome XLIFF Translation Editor
MetaTexis
MultiCorpora MultiTrans
OmegaT
OOxlate
PrimaTrans Software Ecco
Sun Open Language Tools XLIFF
Hans Sussenberger Frankenstein
Telelingua International T-Translator
TermSeek Translator's Intuition
Trolltech Qt Linguist
Wilandra Consulting Frankenstein
WordFisher
7- Some are running under Linux or other O/S systems. Are they efficient?
I will definitly orientate my paper on SDLX and DéjàVu assets as far as user-friendliness is concerned.
For terminology management, I think that Trados Multiterm is very powerful.
8-Don't you think that CAT tools should also work on other O/S than Windows?
9- Giving that SDL bought Trados, we can hope for a tool merging both products. In my opinion, technical software assistance for Trados will be provided for the years to come but it will eventually end. In the long-run, I think that SDL will put on the market a newly updated version of its software that includes Trados features.
We can eventually assist between a harsh concurrence between SDL and Atril. I definitly hope that a third-part will come on the playground!
What do you think about it?
Have a nice evening.
Michaël Sobol ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Admittedly it's the only one I've ever tried! I downloaded the free version, found it very user friendly and bought the licence straightaway. People who know a lot more about CATs than me (that covers most people) tell me that Wordfast does more or less everything that Trados does - and it costs about a tenth as much. Which is why I never bought Trados.
As for compatibility, I send my Wordfast-segmented documents to agencies which use Trados, I receive Trados-segmented documents an... See more Admittedly it's the only one I've ever tried! I downloaded the free version, found it very user friendly and bought the licence straightaway. People who know a lot more about CATs than me (that covers most people) tell me that Wordfast does more or less everything that Trados does - and it costs about a tenth as much. Which is why I never bought Trados.
As for compatibility, I send my Wordfast-segmented documents to agencies which use Trados, I receive Trados-segmented documents and process them with Wordfast, and I import Trados memories into Wordfast. In short, they seem to be fully compatible.
I've only lost a couple of jobs through not having Trados - certainly not enough to justify the expense of buying it. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Some comments about OS and companies | Nov 17, 2005 |
Michaël Sobol wrote:
7- Some are running under Linux or other O/S systems. Are they efficient?
Efficiency does not depend on the operating system. It depends on the software. A good CAT tool can be efficient on Linux, Solaris or Mac OSX.
Some tools were designed to run as native application on any OS, others were designed to run in top of emulators. Programs that need an emulator are slower and do not have the look and feel of the OS.
8-Don't you think that CAT tools should also work on other O/S than Windows?
There are complete CAT suites that run on Linux, Mac OSX and Solaris.
9- Giving that SDL bought Trados, we can hope for a tool merging both products. In my opinion, technical software assistance for Trados will be provided for the years to come but it will eventually end. In the long-run, I think that SDL will put on the market a newly updated version of its software that includes Trados features.
We can eventually assist between a harsh concurrence between SDL and Atril. I definitly hope that a third-part will come on the playground!
What do you think about it?
Common Sense Advisory published a report about Trados/SDL roadmap at http://www.commonsenseadvisory.com/members/res_cgi.php/051021_QT_road_map.php
According to that analysis, three companies could challenge SDL/Trados: Star (Transit), Heartsome and Idiom. Atril is left aside as a secondary option (see tables 1 and 2 of the report).
Regards,
Rodolfo
[Edited at 2005-11-17 01:10]
[Edited at 2005-11-17 01:11]
| | |
|
|
|
Emanuela Ankrom (X)
Italy
Local time: 00:26
English to Italian
+ ...
| Wordfast and OmegaT | Nov 17, 2005 |
I like working with Wordfast and OmegaT. I have found their mailing lists on Yahoo to be very useful.
| | | | Anna Lanave
Italy
Local time: 00:26
French to Italian
+ ...
Uldis Liepkalns wrote:
Hmmm... I actually can not distinguish clean/unclean Wordfast files from Trados ones (and neither can my clients), many a time we have done the job in Wordfast (e.g., when highly specialized translator just don't have requested Trados, but has Wordfast) and told the client it was done in Trados. There never has been any problems.
I don't remember much about Wordfast myself (last time I used it was some 3 years ago), but, as far as I remember, it has option "save as Trados (compatible?)" or like.
Am I missing something?
Uldis
Even if I understand why you acted like that, I don't feel comfortable not telling the truth. I know this may cause the loss of some assignments, but I don't want to take the risk: I am a professional I don't need to lie.
More important is: The agency/customer should know Trados and Wordfast are compatible, of course if they are professional also...
| | | | Anna Lanave
Italy
Local time: 00:26
French to Italian
+ ...
| The importance of knowing how to use a tool.... | Nov 17, 2005 |
Marie-Helene Hayles wrote:
Admittedly it's the only one I've ever tried! I downloaded the free version, found it very user friendly and bought the licence straightaway. People who know a lot more about CATs than me (that covers most people) tell me that Wordfast does more or less everything that Trados does - and it costs about a tenth as much. Which is why I never bought Trados.
As for compatibility, I send my Wordfast-segmented documents to agencies which use Trados, I receive Trados-segmented documents and process them with Wordfast, and I import Trados memories into Wordfast. In short, they seem to be fully compatible.
I've only lost a couple of jobs through not having Trados - certainly not enough to justify the expense of buying it.
I completely agree with you. I just need to get in contact with the right people, which is not always the case.
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 00:26
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| Answers to your next set of questions | Nov 17, 2005 |
Michaël Sobol wrote:
1- What about terminology management?
(As far as I am concerned, multiterm is the best tool)
It all depends on what you mean by "management". Both OmegaT and Wordfast can recognise terminology in the source text in real-time. Wordfast can even check if you've used the right terminology. The next edition of Wordfast will be able to handle multiple language combinations in a single file, with graphics. Wordfast has shortcuts for adding terminology on-the-fly. Wordfast (through PlusTools) offers terminology extraction.
However, you're getting to the point where it may be useful to use seperate, independent tools for what you want to accomplish. Timothy Craven's ExtPhr32 is a much better monolingual term extractor, and Paul Rädle's VTrain is a very userfriendly bilingual terminology lister.
2- TM updating?
(As far as I am concerned, SDLX and DéjàVu are more user-friendly)
OmegaT indexes all source documents and additional TMs at the start of the project for optimal matching. It updates the TM in real time (don't all CAT tools do this?). Although OmegaT offers sentence segmenting, you can't change the segmentation on-the-fly, something which Wordfast does offer (does Trados offer this?). You can use only one active and one passive TM (which only serves 100% matches) in Wordfast. OmegaT uses one active TM and an unlimited number of passive TMs (which serves any percentage matches). Wordfast has a TM editor with some nice tools like reversing the TM, and deleting segments based on wildcard searches.
3- Research criteria? Which software do you find more intuitive on that part?
What do you mean? Both Wordfast and OmegaT have facilities for doing word searches in reference documents (Wordfast does it on-demand, but OmegaT creates an index of keywords at the start of the project which makes it faster for large sets of reference materials). Both OmegaT and Wordfast can do word searches in the translation memory or memories. If you're really lazy, you can link Wordfast to your browser to do Google searches for words you highlight. Is this what you had in mind?
4- Compatibility between different softwares?
Compatibility requires similar workmethods. You can translate a Trados uncleaned document in Wordfast simply because the formats are the same, but you can't use a Trados uncleaned document in OmegaT because the workmethod is completely different. However, the TMs can be shared via the TMX format, can't they? OmegaT uses TMX as its default TM format. Wordfast has its own format but it can import and export TMX.
5- Do you often use word alignement ? Which software do you use for it?
I use PlusTools (from Wordfast). I use it fairly regularly, especially for new clients who happen to have old documents they're willing to share (I usually get them with the "consistency with previous translations" argument). OmegaT doesn't have a built-in aligner yet...
6- Any experiences in those softwares?
Across
Couldn't get it to work, and I don't understand German anyway.
Cypresof Trans Suite 2000
Some people prefer it's aligner, but I find it too cumbersome.
OOxlate
Couldn't get it to work (even after downloading and installing 100's of MB of required software).
PrimaTrans Software Ecco
Yes, and it looks nice, but it's a pity it is no longer developed. Supports unlimited number of glossaries (!!).
Hans Sussenberger Frankenstein
Couldn't get it to work.
WordFisher
This app has some additional project management features which some people seem to find helpful even if they don't use the CAT side of it.
7- Some are running under Linux or other O/S systems. Are they efficient?
OmegaT runs nicely under Linux and OSX. OmegaT is Java based, remember.
For terminology management, I think that Trados Multiterm is very powerful.
Powerful is one thing, but it depends on what you *want*. You can spend all day creating nice terminology files but does it help you translated better and faster at the end of the day?
[Edited at 2005-11-17 13:19]
| | |
|
|
|
Henk Peelen
Netherlands
Local time: 00:26
Member (2002)
German to Dutch
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER
Marie-Helene Hayles wrote:
...
I've only lost a couple of jobs through not having Trados - certainly not enough to justify the expense of buying it.
I can't speak for your situation, because all translators are different. Specialiazation and language pairs have much influence.
In my case, my income rose dramatically after I started working with Trados, but my situation (techm English and German as source languages) asks for using Trados, in my opinion.
Probably prospective clients who were looking for a Trados translator, either didn't find you at all or deceded to not contact you, because you don't show to work with Trados.
Take for instance Trados' Translation Zone where you can put your profile (just like on Proz), so prospective clients can find you via the translation-zone-search-machine, resulting in e-mails like this:
Dear Henk,
Let me first introduce myself: my name's XXX and I work as project manager for YYY, a translation agency located in Clermont-Ferrand, France.
I am currently looking for Dutch translators and found your details via Trados Translation Zone website.
We will receive a large project from ZZZ (printer/scanner/fax) by the end of April.
We will need 5 translators to work full time for 4 weeks on this project and we'll have coordinators as well as local reviewers.
I would like to ask you if you'll be available to work on this project in May, especially from 10.05 until 22.05 (you'll have to translate around 2000 words/day).
If you're interested, please let me know your rates (we will work with Trados).
Thank you in advance for your reply.
Best regards,
XXX
Project Manager
YYY
I don't know whether Wordfast has such kind of search machine as well, neither do I know whether Trados really deservs the high significance especially the tech world credits to it. I simply conclude Trados works for me quite well.
Like said, potential clients could look for you, like the first one below (have a look at your tab "visitors"); the last two visited my profile in 1969. I didn't know Proz.com already exists that long:
11:54am Freelancer 82.92.80.41 Directory
[Search: From: German, To: Dutch, Native Language: Dutch, Software: TRADOS] Kudoz, Profile 9 11:54am
11:07am Not Logged In 68.142.250.16 Direct Link/Unknown Kudoz 7 Nov 13
10:14am Not Logged In 195.93.21.40 Direct Link/Unknown Kudoz 3 Nov 15
9:54am Not Logged In 62.234.133.145 google.nl
[search: curry powder translate] Kudoz 1 N/A
7:43am Not Logged In 194.151.226.35 google.nl
[search: vortexplaat] Kudoz 1 N/A
6:47am Not Logged In 66.249.72.173 Direct Link/Unknown Kudoz, Profile 31 Nov 16
5:55am Not Logged In 84.145.209.226 google.de
[search: minderwerk] Kudoz 1 N/A
3:44am Not Logged In 68.142.250.111 Direct Link/Unknown Kudoz 8 Nov 13
1:33am Not Logged In 68.142.251.37 Direct Link/Unknown Kudoz 6 Nov 13
1:32am Not Logged In 129.68.9.223 google.com
[search: vilsmeier-haack history] Kudoz 2 Dec 31 1969
Nov 16 Freelancer 203.166.250.231 google.com.au
[search: sproeiwater+translation] Kudoz 2 Dec 31 1969
[Edited at 2005-11-17 19:28]
| | | | | Compatibilty depends on the tool, not work method | Nov 17, 2005 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
4- Compatibility between different softwares?
Compatibility requires similar workmethods. You can translate a Trados uncleaned document in Wordfast simply because the formats are the same, but you can't use a Trados uncleaned document in OmegaT because the workmethod is completely different.
Hi,
Compatibility depends on the tool, not on the work method.
You can translate a Trados uncleaned document in Wordfast, but not a TTX file because Wordfast does not support that format.
OmegaT does not support tagged RTF documents or TTX files. That's a limitation of the program.
You can translate tagged RTF or TTX files using Heartsome's XLIFF Editor in any platform. Heartsome does not require MS Word to work with tagged RTF, so clearly compatibility does not depend on the work method.
Trados TTX files are XML files and any CAT tool supporting XML should be able to handle this format. However, not all programs can handle it.
Regards,
Rodolfo
| | | | | Text editors | Nov 17, 2005 |
Jerzy Czopik wrote:
I can chose Word as text editor - and I think no one will argue, that it is better than any of text editors - regardles, if TAG Editor, Transit Satellite or SDLX.
I will argue that. Word is a good text editor, but only on its own. In combination with Trados you get this awkward mess with unflexible blue and green and yellow boxes. Basic stuff like copy/paste and search/replace is a hassle at best (as I mentioned in another reply) - which might seem like a small detail, but to me that's actually a major shortcoming. Certainly not the characteristics of a good text editor.
Just my opinion.
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 00:26
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| You can use what you want... | Nov 17, 2005 |
lanave wrote:
Even if I understand why you acted like that, I don't feel comfortable not telling the truth. I know this may cause the loss of some assignments, but I don't want to take the risk: I am a professional I don't need to lie.
I agree. But unless the client insists that you use only Trados and no other tool, then you are free to use whichever tool you want to, as long as the end-product is that which the client wants.
If, for example, I get a CorelDraw file to translate, and the client doesn't insist that I use *only* CorelDraw, you bet I'm going to extract the text and translate it using MS Word and Wordfast, and then merge it back into the CorelDraw file again.
[Edited at 2005-11-17 14:20]
| | |
|
|
|
Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 00:26
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| We're both right (or wrong), I think | Nov 17, 2005 |
Rodolfo Raya wrote: Samuel Murray wrote:
4- Compatibility between different softwares?
Compatibility requires similar workmethods. Compatibility depends on the tool, not on the work method.
I think we're both right. The OP's statement was about compatibility between *softwares*. The question is indicative of inaccurate thinking. Programs themselves are not compatible or incompatible... rather, file formats are compatible or incompatible.
You can translate a Trados uncleaned document in Wordfast, but not a TTX file because Wordfast does not support that format.
Yes and no. You can translate a Trados uncleaned file with Wordfast without having to pre-process it, but if you want to translate a TTX file in Wordfast, you'd have to pre-process it (and possibly use a few other tools in the conversion process) and once you're done using Wordfast you may also have to post-process it.
| | | | Jaroslaw Michalak
Poland
Local time: 00:26
Member (2004)
English to Polish
SITE LOCALIZER | We are so lucky! | Nov 17, 2005 |
It is so good that each and every tool is the best! It would be much worse if the answers were all: "I cannot really recommend any of these!"
What, for me at least, in my very humble opinion (disclaiming enough? ), is missing in the discussion, is that of greater importance is not what tools do we use, but how we use them.
One example: I do... See more It is so good that each and every tool is the best! It would be much worse if the answers were all: "I cannot really recommend any of these!"
What, for me at least, in my very humble opinion (disclaiming enough? ), is missing in the discussion, is that of greater importance is not what tools do we use, but how we use them.
One example: I do see how Johan finds editing in Word with Trados awkward and unfriendly, but for me this is no issue: I correct most of the segments in the post-editing phase, and for that purpose I find the combination Trados+Word most useful. However, I do not open every single segment before changing it - that IS awkward, but it is really not needed - I can update my TM automatically later on. And in quick browsing, smart replacing etc. Word is quite powerful. If you throw in macros, it gets even better...
The point is, even someone working with the same tool might do it quite differently. On the other hand, there might be some tricks in other tools I am not even aware of. One way or another, it is rather a matter of personal preferences and way of working, than the capabilities of the tools themselves.
In fact, I do hope that it is the way to go. Where I come from we've seen our share of "one solution fits all". It's good to have a choice...
Of course, it would be better with that great-but-unfulfilled-yet promise: XLIFF. Imagine this scenario: the source files (be it Corel Draw, or CAD, or some obscure or proprietary format) is converted by the agency, or even by the client itself (with the tools that translators know nothing about and could not care less) to a friendly XLIFF file. The translator works on it with Trados, SDLX, WordFast, Omega, Heartsome (all the rest is as good!) or even Notepad, with no knowledge of formats, files and properties required. He or she returns it to the agency, which does not really care how it was done... It's the result that counts! That way we could finally go back to what is our job: translating.
I hope it will be sooner than later...
[Edited at 2005-11-17 16:06] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Henk, you're right that ... | Nov 30, 2005 |
... I've no way of knowing how many people have not contacted me because I don't have Trados...
Henk Peelen wrote: Marie-Helene Hayles wrote:
...
I've only lost a couple of jobs through not having Trados - certainly not enough to justify the expense of buying it. I can't speak for your situation, because all translators are different. Specialiazation and language pairs have much influence. In my case, my income rose dramatically after I started working with Trados, but my situation (techm English and German as source languages) asks for using Trados, in my opinion. Probably prospective clients who were looking for a Trados translator, either didn't find you at all or deceded to not contact you, because you don't show to work with Trados.
... but as I'm offered on average about twice as many jobs as I can actually take on, I'm really not that worried about it
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » What CAT software do you find more useful ? | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
| | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news related to CAT tools
