Layout of SDL Studio 2009 makes me squint Thread poster: Marinus Vesseur
|
|---|
Users of SDLX and Across are going to wonder what this is about, because they obviously love the left-pane-is-source-text-and right-pane-is-target-text layout of SDL Studio 2009.
If you're used to Trados, however, the layout is/was: source text up, target text right underneath. I loved that. You would often find the corresponding word in a fuzzy match at roughly the same spot, just a few millimetres underneath the source word.
Same thing in the Workbench: source above,... See more Users of SDLX and Across are going to wonder what this is about, because they obviously love the left-pane-is-source-text-and right-pane-is-target-text layout of SDL Studio 2009.
If you're used to Trados, however, the layout is/was: source text up, target text right underneath. I loved that. You would often find the corresponding word in a fuzzy match at roughly the same spot, just a few millimetres underneath the source word.
Same thing in the Workbench: source above, target right underneath. Great! So neat. So clear! Ideal for a stressed-out scatter-brain like myself.
Now, don't get me wrong: this is not a rant, for a change. Studio actually is quite cool and the Autosuggest function really is worth the investment. But how about the option of putting segments UNDERNEATH eachother, at least in the Translation Results Window.
Question: is there a way to arrange a one-segment-underneath-the other-view in either the Editor or the Results window?
And what about the red-lines-through-what-isn't-there and blue-lines-through-what-is-there look in the Results window? How is THAT an improvement. It feels like total sensory overload to me. It makes me squint.
Here's an example:
This is the effect it has on me:
In case you've never worked with the Trados Workbench before:
Fuzzy matches were displayed with subtle background colors behind the different elements of the segment, which was way more soothing to the mind.
Am I the only one with these issues? Please tell me, so I know what to do: keep bitching about SDL or go see a neurologist.
Thanks! ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Jerzy Czopik 
Germany
Local time: 04:40
Member (2003)
Polish to German
+ ...
| You're not the only one | Oct 31, 2009 |
Just take a closer look at ideas.sdl.com and you will find even more than one idea about that - one or more for the horizontal view and at least one for bringing back the background marking.
BTW, if you just see double, you're a lucky guy, because you still do see something. From more than three or four changes I do not see anything more...
| | | |
| I'm glad I went for another option... | Oct 31, 2009 |
...which has the option to see the current segment in the horizontal mode as you suggest. How long will SDL Studio 2009 users have to wait for the options we already enjoy today in other side-by-side tools? Nobody knows!
| | | |
| Competition... | Nov 1, 2009 |
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
...which has the option to see the current segment in the horizontal mode as you suggest.
At least 3 tools from the main Trados competitors (DVX, MemoQ, Wordfast Pro) provide the horizontal mode as option.
How long will SDL Studio 2009 users have to wait for the options we already enjoy today in other side-by-side tools? Nobody knows!
Ask SDL
Cheers
GG
| | |
|
|
|
Marinus Vesseur
Canada
Local time: 19:40
English to Dutch
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Wordfast may be the better Trados? | Nov 1, 2009 |
I keep postponing the switch to Wordfast, but it'll be unavoidable. Wordfast was the least forthcoming about cross-upgrading at the Virtual Conference, but I also keep hesitating because every system has a learning curve and its own issues (wouldn't want to jump out of the frying pan and into the fire), but since the switch to Studio is basically like having the learn an entirely new program anyway, this is definitely the right time to make that change.
Then again, Wordfast also cha... See more I keep postponing the switch to Wordfast, but it'll be unavoidable. Wordfast was the least forthcoming about cross-upgrading at the Virtual Conference, but I also keep hesitating because every system has a learning curve and its own issues (wouldn't want to jump out of the frying pan and into the fire), but since the switch to Studio is basically like having the learn an entirely new program anyway, this is definitely the right time to make that change.
Then again, Wordfast also changed its format. It's called Pro now. I downloaded the trial version. It looks nice, but has some serious bugs as well. This may not be the solution either. Darn.
[Edited at 2009-11-01 20:20 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
| After Trados, the Wordfast learning curve is short and fast | Nov 2, 2009 |
Marinus Vesseur wrote:
I keep postponing the switch to Wordfast, but it'll be unavoidable. Wordfast was the least forthcoming about cross-upgrading at the Virtual Conference, but I also keep hesitating because every system has a learning curve and its own issues (wouldn't want to jump out of the frying pan and into the fire), but since the switch to Studio is basically like having the learn an entirely new program anyway, this is definitely the right time to make that change.
Then again, Wordfast also changed its format. It's called Pro now. I downloaded the trial version. It looks nice, but has some serious bugs as well. This may not be the solution either. Darn.
[Edited at 2009-11-01 20:20 GMT]
Wordfast Pro has not replaced Wordfast Classic - it is a new development. While I still have not learnt to use Wordfast Pro, I downloaded and tried the latest Classic version in January this year on one computer while my 'guru' was hassling with a Trados update and bug on my laptop. I was done before he was! I had to buy the licence in order to handle my legacy TMs, but it was worth every cent.
As a Trados user but not an IT expert, I had Wordfast Classic up and running in two or three hours. I still have to consult the manual now and then, but believe me, it does not take many minutes, and then you are back in business again.
Wordfast does not have quite the streamlined appearance of Trados, and the concordance does not seem to be quite as good (even with identical TMs). So I have not abandoned Trados, but I use Wordfast regularly, depending on the job in hand.
Forget Pro until you are ready for it - you can have Classic working from scratch in a couple of hours!
And best of luck!
| | | |
| Wordfast learning curve | Nov 2, 2009 |
Christine Andersen wrote:
As a Trados user but not an IT expert, I had Wordfast Classic up and running in two or three hours. I still have to consult the manual now and then, but believe me, it does not take many minutes, and then you are back in business again.[/quote]
My students need approx. 8-9 hours to be independent in Trados (I spend almost half of this time to explain en reexplain Multiterm iss.... huh... features) while with Wordfast (Classic), they're ready to go after 90 minutes of a guided tour.
If I insist on guided it's because I start with some Pandora Box options related to the terminology handling and automation, it's not a common aproach for a beginner.
Of course, the fact they start with Trados affects the speed of the Wordfast learning but the general reaction is "Daaaamn, it's so simple...".
PS.
In the real life, I don't use Wordfast.
Cheers
GG
[Edited at 2009-11-02 12:28 GMT]
| | | |
| ideas.sdl.com | Nov 2, 2009 |
Hi Marinus,
there are ideas on ideas.sdl.com that support your ideas. Please vote for them.
| | |
|
|
|
Jamie Lucero
United States
Local time: 19:40
French to English
| More on switching to Wordfast | Nov 3, 2009 |
Christine Andersen wrote:
Wordfast Pro has not replaced Wordfast Classic - it is a new development.
Wordfast Pro (standalone Java application) and Classic (Word-based application) are in fact the two parts of Wordfast Translation Studio. It used to be that if you bought a license, you got Classic. Now with the Studio development, you get both Classic and Pro with the same license. I don't think they have changed the price either.
Christine Andersen wrote:
While I still have not learnt to use Wordfast Pro, I downloaded and tried the latest Classic version in January this year on one computer while my 'guru' was hassling with a Trados update and bug on my laptop. I was done before he was!
It's worth trying Pro just for the reason I mentioned above. However, Pro can be learned in a snap as well. Admittedly, the documentation is a bit lacking, but many of the functions are similar to Classic and the interface is intuitive enough that it can be figured out with a bit of experimentation. Also, it is quite complementary to Classic because it is easier to work with file types like InDesign.
Grzegorz Gryc wrote:
My students need approx. 8-9 hours to be independent in Trados (I spend almost half of this time to explain en reexplain Multiterm iss.... huh... features) while with Wordfast (Classic), they're ready to go after 90 minutes of a guided tour.
I teach TM tools in a translation program, and I also use Classic because of its simplicity. The students catch on rather fast, most likely because they can leverage their MS Word skills, and because it is so easy to start a project (no 10-step wizards to suffer through). Pro has simplicity in its own way, like the ability to drag an drop files and immediately get started on a project or the uncluttered interface.
Wordfast updates and improves its products constantly, so it's worth trying a newer version if you had any issues with a past version. Also, if you report issues, they will get fixed relatively quickly at no extra cost to you.
Jamie
| | | |
| I feel the same | Aug 25, 2010 |
I second this opinion. I voted for all such ideas at sdl.ideas. I also need desperately the old layout back.
Does someone here know Deja Vu? It has the same column layout, but with an option to edit in a separate area divided by an horizontal line. When I discovered this option there, I felt much safer!
And then I only use the column layout to review, which is much more comfortable.
... See more I second this opinion. I voted for all such ideas at sdl.ideas. I also need desperately the old layout back.
Does someone here know Deja Vu? It has the same column layout, but with an option to edit in a separate area divided by an horizontal line. When I discovered this option there, I felt much safer!
And then I only use the column layout to review, which is much more comfortable.
[Edited at 2010-08-25 12:09 GMT]
[Edited at 2010-08-25 12:09 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Walter Blaser
Switzerland
Local time: 04:40
French to German
+ ...
| Tastes are individual | Aug 25, 2010 |
...It has the same column layout, but with an option to edit in a separate area divided by an horizontal line. When I discovered this option there, I felt much safer! And then I only use the column layout to review, which is much more comfortable.
How opinions can differ? I have met a lot of colleagues who tell me that they like the vertical layout (Studio) for translation but would prefer the horizontal one for reviewing.
As you see, it is difficult to satisfy everyone.
Walter
| | | |
Jerzy Czopik
Germany
Local time: 04:40
Member (2003)
Polish to German
+ ...
| In the land before time | Aug 25, 2010 |
or stop, sorry - even not so long ahgo I remember longish discussions, when people were cirtisizing Trados for its horizontal layout.
Ridiculous I've read then there, you can't see the context, you are forced to focus on just one single sentence. Proofreading in that format shall have been a thing of impossibility I was told then. And many other similar comments. The vertical layout of SDLX and DejaVu would be so far superior to Trados I was told.
Well, some water went down the Rhine... See more or stop, sorry - even not so long ahgo I remember longish discussions, when people were cirtisizing Trados for its horizontal layout.
Ridiculous I've read then there, you can't see the context, you are forced to focus on just one single sentence. Proofreading in that format shall have been a thing of impossibility I was told then. And many other similar comments. The vertical layout of SDLX and DejaVu would be so far superior to Trados I was told.
Well, some water went down the Rhine river here and what do I hear now: bring back the old layout!
But in fact I agree that the option should be leaving the user the choice. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Jerzy Czopik wrote:
But in fact I agree that the option should be leaving the user the choice.
Yes, that's the way to go. Absolutely.
| | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news related to SDL Trados
