Wordfast Licence agreement
Thread poster: Being Earnest

Being Earnest
Italy
Local time: 12:46
Italian to English
Nov 9, 2009

Be very careful when purchasing WordFast. I have just purchased it through a group buy and it worked very well. The only problem is that in the small print it states that the license is only valid for 3 years. Any upgrade during this period is free. After 3 years the license costs 50% of total price. Be aware as I have been bitten and twice shy...

[Edited at 2009-11-09 15:57 GMT]


 

Laurent KRAULAND  Identity Verified
France
Local time: 12:46
French to German
+ ...
Small print? Nov 9, 2009

This is made public on the Wordfast site, I think...

 

Lori Cirefice  Identity Verified
France
Local time: 12:46
French to English
shortest EULA in the history of CAT tools Nov 9, 2009

When you purchase Wordfast, you have to check the box that says "I agree with the Wordfast User License Agreement (short, important - click to read!)"

It really *is* short, and quite generous compared to Trados upgrade conditions (for example)...


 

Laurent KRAULAND  Identity Verified
France
Local time: 12:46
French to German
+ ...
Generosity Nov 9, 2009

Lori Cirefice wrote:


It really *is* short, and quite generous compared to Trados upgrade conditions (for example)...


It is even more generous that, with the release of Wordfast 6.0 (now "Pro" - and yes, this software works without any trouble AFAIAC), every Wordfast Classic license holder was entitled to generate a free license(!) for Wordfast Pro...


 

Leonardo La Malfa  Identity Verified
Italy
Local time: 12:46
English to Italian
+ ...
Whose generosity? Nov 9, 2009

Laurent KRAULAND wrote:

Lori Cirefice wrote:


It really *is* short, and quite generous compared to Trados upgrade conditions (for example)...


It is even more generous that, with the release of Wordfast 6.0 (now "Pro" - and yes, this software works without any trouble AFAIAC), every Wordfast Classic license holder was entitled to generate a free license(!) for Wordfast Pro...


Yeah, right! Considering it's still heavily malfunctioning (!), they couldn't seriously ask for more money! Consider it as a way to have a wider community of translators testing their beta release for free, although this prematurely official release has been marketed as ready for production - a plain lie, as anyone having tried can honestly confirm. Yes, they're improving on it - and they should thank (pay back?) their pool of international testers for this - but it's not enough, yet. When it's seriously ready for production, I'm sure they'll get serious about the price as well, no maybes about it!


 

Laurent KRAULAND  Identity Verified
France
Local time: 12:46
French to German
+ ...
Same problems as with Trados, or so it seems Nov 9, 2009

Hi Leonardo,
this seems to be the same problem as with Trados - works fine on some computers and not on other ones. Why? I must admit I don't know the reason...

[Edited at 2009-11-09 19:57 GMT]


 

Mohamed Mehenoun  Identity Verified
Algeria
Local time: 11:46
Member (2008)
English to French
+ ...
Fairly decent Nov 9, 2009

Hello,

I don't see wordfast as a scammer ! As far as I am concerned they're the only ones who offer a consequent discount for people in the third world...

They also offer a fairly decent service !

The compatibility is a matter of configurations I guess as the developper seem to have a tendency to configure their software for "standard machines", now standard for them means that you buy a machine and you leave it as is ! I'm strongly against that as the software should adapt to the human and not the opposite...

MoH


 

QUOI  Identity Verified

Chinese to English
+ ...
Are you able to elaborate on this? Nov 9, 2009

Hi Leonardo,
I am considering WFP. Are you able to elaborate on what sort of "heavily malfunctioning" you have experienced so far? It may be very helpful to me (and others).
Thanks


Leonardo La Malfa wrote:

Yeah, right! Considering it's still heavily malfunctioning (!), they couldn't seriously ask for more money! ....


 

Ulf Samuelsson  Identity Verified
Mexico
Local time: 05:46
Member (2007)
English to Swedish
+ ...
Better than most Nov 9, 2009

The Wordfast licencing system is the best I know of, really.
You pay for three years, and get free updates during those three years, and your last installation is fully functional even after those three years as long as you do not change your computer.

After those three years, the fee for the next three years is lower. I would really prefer that more companies adopted the same system, rather than having to pay for an upgrade every two years, like with Trados.

There are really few programs these days which do not have to be upgraded in a three-year period. So, what's the problem with the Wordfast license?


 

Leonardo La Malfa  Identity Verified
Italy
Local time: 12:46
English to Italian
+ ...
Elaborating on unpaid beta testing Nov 9, 2009

words@large wrote:

Hi Leonardo,
I am considering WFP. Are you able to elaborate on what sort of "heavily malfunctioning" you have experienced so far? It may be very helpful to me (and others).
Thanks


After the second time they released the new Window$ version several days before the versions for "the rest" of the OSs, I honestly gave up. Unless I be mistaken, the previous time it took weeks. This alone reveals much about their customer care. I mean, I use Linux, shame on me, but I paid exactly the same amount of money at the exact moment I was required to, but always get my updated copy of the software considerably later than the "normal" guys out there? Why? Are we second-class customers? Was our money any different from the others'? I mean, if the software isn't ready, cool, don't release it until it is. And the same is true for updates: when it's ready, it is for everybody, not for those lucky chaps that are running their app on Window$. I feel sort of discriminated, yeah! Oh, but I almost forgot: we didn't actually pay for this nice piece of... software.

So, sorry, I haven't been helping out testing their application lately, so I can't report specific bugs. However, I can do much more than you actually asked for:
1) Download the free demo - in their own words: "Try Before You Buy!". Install it, try it, make up your mind, and decide for yourself. Report any bug you may find, and look for support. Which brings me to the next point:
2) Join the group - In their own words, it's a "support group for Wordfast Professional, a platform-independent tool for the entire localization chain". Before writing to the community, you may want to search for a specific topic through the "Search" function. Which brings me to the next point:
3) If you feel my post did not elaborate on WFP's malfunctions as much as you were expecting, feel free to browse the group database thoroughly. I'm sure detailed exchanges on very specific issues will give you a broader view of the situation, leaving you free to decide for yourself.

Thank you for your time, and good luck!


 

darkokoporcic  Identity Verified
Slovenia
Local time: 12:46
Member (2005)
German to Slovenian
+ ...
Wordfast vs. Trados Nov 10, 2009

Well, I can't speak about Wf 6 because I haven't tried it but as for previous versions, I would gladly pay the full price of the licence once in three years (and I did it). Reason: the original price of the software. It is four or five times less than Trados. With the full functionality, as far as the freelancer is concerned. You can't use the same version of Trados for ten years either because they take good care that it gets totaly obsolete much sooner than that. So, let's compare the price of Trados upgrades and draw conclusions based upon that.

 

esperantisto  Identity Verified
Local time: 13:46
Member (2006)
English to Russian
+ ...
If you’re not comfortable with the WF license, Nov 10, 2009

Being Earnest wrote:

Be aware as I have been bitten and twice shy...


why not try free software such as OmegaT or Anaphraseus?


 

xxxNMR
France
Local time: 12:46
French to Dutch
+ ...
Wordfast 6 Professional Nov 10, 2009

I am not convinced about the layout which seems complicated, and went back to the Classic version with which I am working for eight years now, which is really fast and offers more options, but Professional is fully functional on a standard Vista computer. As for beta-testing, it is up to you to decide if you want to contribute to it. As for the price, are you an amateurist or a professional translator with business expenses?

 

José Henrique Lamensdorf  Identity Verified
Brazil
Local time: 07:46
English to Portuguese
+ ...
Software that works on SOME systems Nov 10, 2009

This is not strictly about WordFast, but on the allegation that it - and other software - works fine in some systems, but not all of them.

To illustrate, I'll use the example of a presentation software named Astound, now extinct. The company changed name, shifted focus, and buried it. I used it for several years, built really astoundingicon_smile.gif presentations with it. It even imported PowerPoint presentations so the user could enhance them considerably, and make them much more reliable. My personal impression is that if a strong marketing company like e.g. Adobe had been behind Astound, Microsoft would have given up on PowerPoint years ago.

The last version (#8) of Astound was developed for Windows 98. It had several glitches their tech guys couldn't solve, so it was eventually phased out. Power users developed ways to circumvent these flaws, but it was not so easy. Then Windows XP came up and, to my absolute amazement, ALL these operating flaws suddenly vanished. Astound was already dead and buried, so it was not a magic update or upgrade, just the removal of countless W98 flaws in the shift to WXP.

Back to WordFast, actually to MS Word, I see it getting worse and worse every time. W97 was bad enough, but it worked okay. The translation market forced me to upgrade to W2003, which has a gazillion additional resources, but countless bugs, on top of being a lot peskier and less stable. I've heard of some fellow translators' hair-rising misadventures with W2007, and am scared at the idea that the market may eventually force me into upgrading again.

WordFast worked on W97 much better and faster than it does on W2003 (and I've significantly upgraded my hardware). So just as Astound's flaws were a result of Windows 98's shortcomings, maybe WordFast suffers form Word's bugs.

The bottom line is that the best jockey won't win a race riding a sick horse.

[Edited at 2009-11-10 10:11 GMT]


 

Leonardo La Malfa  Identity Verified
Italy
Local time: 12:46
English to Italian
+ ...
Software they sell for ALL systems Nov 10, 2009

José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:

WordFast worked on W97 much better and faster than it does on W2003 (and I've significantly upgraded my hardware). So just as Astound's flaws were a result of Windows 98's shortcomings, maybe WordFast suffers form Word's bugs.

The bottom line is that the best jockey won't win a race riding a sick horse.

[Edited at 2009-11-10 10:11 GMT]


I see the implications of this bottom line, and generally agree with you. However, in this particular thread Wordfast Pro, not Classic, was being addressed. In fact, WFP runs independently from M$ Word, hence it can't suffer from its bugs. I am not even required to have Word installed on my system, for WFP to run properly.

Having excluded that, and just to contextualise accordingly, as a consequence the sick horse in your reasoning within this particular topic should refer now to Linux, one of SOME systems where the application being discussed should just work out-of-the-box. As a general premise, and in order not to restrict my considerations to the Linux world following my previous post, I have used WFP both on Linux Ubuntu and Windows XP with similar results - in fact, the highest percentage of users reporting bugs through the dedicated Yahoo Groups is running the application on some version of the M$ OS - most notably XP and Svista! As for my personal experience with Ubuntu, I can say it's reasonably reliable, apart from some harmless glitches that come around upgrading time, when new features just need to settle in. And surely, I find it much more reliable than my copy of Windows XP. But it just relates to my hardware, and is my personal experience, which doesn't necessarily need to apply to anyone else. In addition, let me just stress that if I buy an application that has been advertised as being multi-platform, i.e. able to run on Windows, Linux, and Mac, I expect it to do so despite the platform I choose for work and for personal reasons. As a professional, I expect to pay a professional price for a professional piece of software that works professionally. If it does work on SOME OSs professionally, but not so on OTHERS, well, I just don't consider it professional to say it is a professional app in the very first place. Despite the convoluted reasoning, on the contrary, one would even expect to have a better copy on Linux and Mac since they even have some extra time to improve on it, after the "official" version is released for SOME. Either the application is not ready yet, or they don't fully support OTHER OSs and should concentrate on where the money flow seems larger. And be honest about it throughout their marketing hype!

Of course, one can still say that if the PRO version isn't working properly, for some operations we still have a working copy of WF Classic. Actually, it's what you hear most often in the dedicated Yahoo Group, also from the WF staff at some point. And one should seriously wonder if the whole STUDIO operation really boils down to this. Is that a serious thing to say, however, when one is experiencing problems with WFP? I didn't pay more for it because I already had a fully licensed copy of WFC, fair enough, but what about those new users who are pushed, on the one hand, by some translation agencies and reassured, on the other, by the Company marketing efforts that they are going to get the world's #1 platform-independent TM tool, just to end up with an unstable application that is still (secretly) in beta stage, despite having been on the market for 1 full year these days? But I assume I should always remind myself that they don't actually charge extra fees for WFP, before complaining about its functionality.

NMR wrote:

As for beta-testing, it is up to you to decide if you want to contribute to it. As for the price, are you an amateurist or a professional translator with business expenses?


It's up to me to decide would mean, in the light of what I've just been saying, that I'm free to use it or not. True! Unfortunately, if I'm free to use it, and it malfunctions, I'll inevitably look for solutions, and by asking questions in the Wordfast Support forum, the Yahoo Group, or elsewhere, I'll still be unwillingly but surely cooperating in the beta testing. But my point was aiming at calling things with their proper name, instead of hiding the truth behind a thick marketing blanket (fully functional for production vs. beta stage). And as for the price, I'm not sure you were actually talking to me, because I never complained about their licensing scheme, which I've always found fair.


 


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:


You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

Wordfast Licence agreement

Advanced search


Translation news related to Wordfast





Anycount & Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000

Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.

More info »
SDL Trados Studio 2017 only €435 / $519
Get the cheapest prices for SDL Trados Studio 2017 on ProZ.com

Join this translator’s group buy brought to you by ProZ.com and buy SDL Trados Studio 2017 Freelance for only €435 / $519 / £345 / ¥63000 You will also receive FREE access to Studio 2019 when released.

More info »



Forums
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search