| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | Which CAT Tool is simple to use/learn to use and is an affordable price? Thread poster: Sarah Downing
|
|---|
RobinB 
United States
Local time: 15:38
German to English
| Yes, try Fusion | May 7, 2004 |
Sarah,
I'd second Bandi by recommending Fusion. A 90-day evaluation (full version, not "castrated") is available free here on ProZ.
It does everything Trados and all the others can do, and much more besides (e.g. now has really usable bilingual term extraction). It also has a decent terminology management tool, and everything comes in a single package (unlike Trados). It's easy to learn (much easier than e.g. Trados), though probably not as easy as Wordfast simply becau... See more Sarah,
I'd second Bandi by recommending Fusion. A 90-day evaluation (full version, not "castrated") is available free here on ProZ.
It does everything Trados and all the others can do, and much more besides (e.g. now has really usable bilingual term extraction). It also has a decent terminology management tool, and everything comes in a single package (unlike Trados). It's easy to learn (much easier than e.g. Trados), though probably not as easy as Wordfast simply because Fusion can do so much more. As to pricing, I'm not sure if pricing has been decided by the developers yet. Last time I spoke to them, they were thinking about offering a monthly subscription fee for the first fully commercial version. Nothing dramatic, something like 20-30 dollars a month, so you can expense it immediately and aren't burdened by a fixed asset you have to amortise. And if you don't want to use it any more, you just stop paying. Plus, the developers are very keen to receive user feedback and subsequently incorporate changes into the software.
Give it a try anyway. Robin ▲ Collapse
| | | | Intergraf
Local time: 15:38
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Please don't infer something that was never even implied | May 7, 2004 |
Gillian Scheibelein wrote: I have been told to stay away from TRANSIT (supposedly too complicated) I've heard that too, but I've also heard it's the most powerful and versatile of the bunch. Unfortunately, there's no trial for it, as far as I know. Why is it that Transit keeps getting bad press here? The number of people saying "they have "heard" Transit is not good" keeps growing.
I don't believe Sarah or I said that "Transit is not good".
Sarah said, as you quoted, that she had "been told to stay away from TRANSIT (supposedly too complicated)," the key words being "too complicated".
And, again as quoted by you, I concurred with her about hearing that Transit is "too complicated" when I said that "I've heard that too." I made that statement because I was told by some Transit users of many years standing that it had a steep learning curve, especially for someone who was new to CAT tools – which I was at the time and which Sarah is now by her own admission.
You seem to forget that in that same statement you quoted I also said this: "I've also heard it's the most powerful and versatile of the bunch."
Just wanted to clear that up – I have a real thing about people putting words in mouth that never came out of it. I get into enough trouble with what really comes out of my mouth, and I don't need anyone's help on that score, thankyouverymuch.
T.
| | | | | Sorry Intergraf that you have misinterpreted what I was trying to say | May 7, 2004 |
I did not intend to put any words in your mouth. I merely wrote that Transit has been getting bad press on this site and quoted exactly what you and Sarah wrote - including your the "best of the bunch".
regards, Jill
[Edited at 2004-05-07 19:20]
| | | | 00000000 (X)
English to French
+ ...
I have Trados Freelance 6 and SDLX 2004 Standard but I use Wordfast whenever possible.
What I like most about it is the fact that whenever there seems to be a problem, I can just open the TM in Word and have a look at it.
I also like Fusion, mostly for its wonderful Terminology/Dictionary tools.
Esther
| | |
|
|
|
Intergraf
Local time: 15:38
Spanish to English
+ ...
| It's quite possible that Trados might not be the ideal choice either... | May 7, 2004 |
Benjamin/tectransDE wrote:
...Wordfast is not the ideal choice.
There are quite a few projects that I would never outsource to a translator who has "only" Wordfast and not Trados. This is especially true for tagged files such as HTML, XML and PageMaker, FrameMaker, InDesign and such. (We've all made our experiences.)
Trados' tools for editing these files are just vastly superior in terms of ensuring data integrity and smooth process flow (agencytranslator).
From what I've read in various places (forums, mailing lists, etc.), I think you and many other agencies would be mighty surprised at the number of translators who truthfully say they have Trados, yet carry out the translation work in another tool more of their choice, such as Wordfast or Déjà Vu (these two appear to be the most commonly used ones).
More people than you might suspect own a copy of Trados and seldom use it for the actual translation work. From what I've gathered, if they use it at all, it's to segment or pre-translate the job, or to tweak it or the TM before and after they do the work in their tool of choice, and then only if necessary. Some people use more than one tool, in what is known as "CAT bouncing". The client never knows the difference.
I think it's a real shame that some translators won't admit to what they're doing – it just reinforces the idea that Trados is the be-all and end-all when it comes to CAT tools. It isn't. No CAT tool is. They each have their strengths and weaknesses, and sometimes one tool is better than the others for a specific type of job.
Most translators do seem to tell their clients what they're doing, and, as long as his/her Trados can handle the output, the client is happy – which is really the important thing after all, isn't it?
At least two translators that I recall reading about use both Wordfast and Déjà Vu regularly, depending on the length and complexity of the job at hand. They both have Trados. Their clients have Trados. The translators use the tools they like best, the client has no problems at his/her end, and everybody's happy. To my mind, that's exactly the way it should be.
Whichever tool you use, though, the most important thing will always be that you understand the workings behind the technology (i.e. what is a segment, a fuzzy match, a tag, a character entity and so forth). In my view, working with TMs inevitably demands a higher level of understanding from a translator, because it adds a level of complexity to the mere translation.
Well put!
You're very right in saying that the user of CAT tools needs to be educated about the technology and the workings behind it. It makes it much easier when using the tools, especially when you're evaluating them to find the one that's the best fit for your comfort level and the way you work.
From what Sarah said, though, her clients don't care what CAT tool she uses, or if she uses one at all. She's looking for a tool that will help her mostly with the work for one particular client. She didn't particularly like Trados when she looked at it. In future, she might come to the conclusion that it's the best one for her, or she may acquire clients who demand that she use it.
Given the present circumstances, though, my recommendation would be that she should choose whatever tool works best for her in her present situation. When that situation changes, then she can look again and see what's best for her at that time. It may or may not be what she is already using.
There's nothing worse than choosing an expensive piece of software based on someone else's experience of it or because it's the most popular thing out there, only to have it sit there gathering dust because you don't like working with it. That tends to promote a lot of kicking yourself in the rear for having spent the money on something that turns out to be useless to you, no matter how highly others might rate it.
We spend our working day using different tools, and we must be comfortable with those tools. This goes for all things in our work environment, from something as basic as a pen or pencil to jot down notes to the most sophisticated piece of hardware or software we own and use daily. Translation is hard enough on the body and mind as it is – let's not make it harder by being physically or mentally uncomfortable while we do it.
My $0.02 – and my apologies for the length of the post... I'm afraid I do tend to run on.
T.
| | | | Intergraf
Local time: 15:38
Spanish to English
+ ...
| No problem :-) | May 7, 2004 |
Gillian Scheibelein wrote:
I did not intend to put any words in your mouth.
No problem. And no offense taken, in case you wondered about that from the way I worded my response. I\'m in pain right now and tend to be edgy and even brusque until the pain-killers kick in – so please don\'t take offense at the way I frame my answer, for none is intended.
I did think that you had taken Sarah\'s comment and mine as another way of saying that \"Transit is no good,\" and it\'s just not so.
I merely wrote that Transit has been getting bad press on this site and quoted exactly what you and Sarah wrote - including your the \"best of the bunch\".
I know what you quoted and what you wrote in response to it. I just wanted to make things perfectly clear. This compulsion of mine about making things clear is but one of the many crosses I have to bear in this lifetime. LOL
Hope you have a happy weekend, with lots of rest and relaxation! (I have a job to do for Monday, so no rest for the wicked... )
T.
| | | |
I've slightly reworded my initial post.
Sorry to hear that you are in pain. I get a real headbanger migrane every 14 days or so, so I really sympathize.
cheers, Jill
| | | | Marc P (X)
Local time: 22:38
German to English
+ ...
Try the latest version, 1.3.11. Download from groups.yahoo.com/group/omegat.
Marc
| | |
|
|
|
Lia Fail (X)
Spain
Local time: 22:38
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Wordfast vs. Trados - make a needs analysis | May 8, 2004 |
tectransDE wrote:
There are quite a few projects that I would never outsource to a translator who has "only" Wordfast and not Trados. This is especially true for tagged files such as HTML, XML and PageMaker, FrameMaker, InDesign and such. (We've all made our experiences.)
tectranslate, Germany
I would say this is a good angle to take on the decision. Precisely what kind of work do you do and what kind of enquiries do you get that you have to turn down cos you haven't got the technology? Once you assess that you can decide whether Wordfast is sufficient or you need Trados or similiar.
My own experience. I used WordFast, then bought Trados. The difference in price is about triple against the latter. After 6 months of Trados my experience is that I end up only using the feature that WordFast offers (translation memory), to date I have not used the terminology tools - MultiTerm and Term Xtract - as I simply do NOT have the time to explore them, and the latter seems really complex. As for Win Align I managed to align a few small texts but when it came to the crunch, for a big job it just failed miserably, kept shutting/crashing (a text with 16000 words and NOT a single graphic). As for technical problems, yes I have had some but nothing really major.
Overall I rather regret buying it, as what I am using of it makes it an over-investment.
My advice:
1. assess your needs (what you do and what you are offered that you have to turn down)
2. consider starting off with WordFast, (trial version is a bit limited, preferably buy it) at max 200 euros it's an excellent investment, you won't regret it at all. It will certianly be useful, has a simple glossary feature, and you get to learn the technology in a very user-friendly way. After that you could consider investing in a bigger system and you will still be able to use all the memories created with WordFast. Plus you will have learned the basic concepts. So you don't lose out.
| | | | NGK
United States
Local time: 15:38
| Something to consider | May 8, 2004 |
Are you sure that using a CAT tool will improve your translations and/or speed up the process?
I use CAT only sporadically, usually because a client requires it, and I have found it a time waster. To be sure, I don't doubt that there are many types of translation where CAT can improve the process significantly. But just as surely, there are many other types of translation where CAT software is more of a hindrance than a help (or where its use isn't even possible), and it so happens ... See more Are you sure that using a CAT tool will improve your translations and/or speed up the process?
I use CAT only sporadically, usually because a client requires it, and I have found it a time waster. To be sure, I don't doubt that there are many types of translation where CAT can improve the process significantly. But just as surely, there are many other types of translation where CAT software is more of a hindrance than a help (or where its use isn't even possible), and it so happens that the kind of translation that I typically do falls in the latter category.
Regardless of the cost (if any) of the software, be aware that CAT, contrary to its reputation, can really slow you down. Unless you do translations of large, highly repetitive documents, such as technical documentation or financial reports, I would think twice about even bothering. Client-mandated terminology doesn't necessarily require CAT software.
My 2¢.
(BTW, Wordfast 3 is freeware.) ▲ Collapse
| | | | Jörgen Slet
Estonia
Local time: 23:38
English to Estonian
+ ...
| What are the "superior features" of Trados ? | May 10, 2004 |
tectransDE wrote:
...Wordfast is not the ideal choice.
There are quite a few projects that I would never outsource to a translator who has "only" Wordfast and not Trados. This is especially true for tagged files such as HTML, XML and PageMaker, FrameMaker, InDesign and such. (We've all made our experiences.)
Trados' tools for editing these files are just vastly superior in terms of ensuring data integrity and smooth process flow (agencytranslator).
I am working on a large tagged Quark project, so far I have broken one tag translating in Wordfast, the editor has broken one using Trados. What exactly are those "superior" features ? I haven't done any real work with Trados myself, but I was given a short demo on the tagged files I was to work on, and I saw nothing that I wasn't used to seeing in Wordfast.
| | | | Brandis (X)
Local time: 22:38
English to German
+ ...
| Check CAT-Tool rating | May 10, 2004 |
Jörgen wrote: tectransDE wrote:
...Wordfast is not the ideal choice.
There are quite a few projects that I would never outsource to a translator who has "only" Wordfast and not Trados. This is especially true for tagged files such as HTML, XML and PageMaker, FrameMaker, InDesign and such. (We've all made our experiences.)
Trados' tools for editing these files are just vastly superior in terms of ensuring data integrity and smooth process flow (agencytranslator).
I am working on a large tagged Quark project, so far I have broken one tag translating in Wordfast, the editor has broken one using Trados. What exactly are those "superior" features ? I haven't done any real work with Trados myself, but I was given a short demo on the tagged files I was to work on, and I saw nothing that I wasn't used to seeing in Wordfast.
| | |
|
|
|
Sarah Downing
Local time: 16:38
German to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Thank you very much ... | May 12, 2004 |
... to everyone for your helpful comments and suggestions.
| | | | Judy Yeaton
United States
Local time: 22:38
Czech to English
+ ...
Hi Sarah,
About a month ago I was in the same position – curious, but hesitant about the time requirement even more than the cash outlay for starting with a CAT. I tried compiling tables of features, but discovered I didn\'t know which were important to me. They all offer a free 30-day trial period, but that means investing a month in learning a program you may never use, or simply going with the first one you try because after a month you don\'t want to think about star... See more Hi Sarah,
About a month ago I was in the same position – curious, but hesitant about the time requirement even more than the cash outlay for starting with a CAT. I tried compiling tables of features, but discovered I didn\'t know which were important to me. They all offer a free 30-day trial period, but that means investing a month in learning a program you may never use, or simply going with the first one you try because after a month you don\'t want to think about starting over with another.
So I started fooling around with some of the less-intimidating programs, just to see whether I even wanted to bother with CAT.
The first one was Wordfisher, which isn\'t really a CAT, since it doesn\'t offer you matches, but otherwise works in a similar way (one you\'d be familiar with from your mention of the InfoRapid program). It offers glossary-building functions, and you could use your client\'s preferred terminology with it. You can start using individual functions immediately, and anything you learn will help you if you decide to go on to something more powerful. And at $30, it costs about half what some standalone glossary builders do.
Wordfast isn\'t freeware, although you can try it - indefinitely, I believe - for free (with reduced functionality). It\'s still in the process of construction, and some versions work better than others. My main gripe is the manual, which tends to be vague at crucial times: \"For most languages you do not need Unicode.\" But which ones DO you need it for? It would only have taken a line to specify. Or: \"The browser enables you to explore the hard drive... \" Good, but how? I\'ve never seen this type before. (Write the folder name in \"\" is the trick.) What I really like about the program is the ability it offers to connect to on-line glossaries directly from the translation – enter a keyboard shortcut, and in an instant the word where your cursor is parked is being looked up at Multitran or Leo or wherever you\'ve connected to. This is something I believe Trados doesn\'t offer.
MetaTexis I\'ve only started to use recently, but I like it so far – it works smoothly and setting up a translation seems more straightforward than with Wordfast, although to be fair, it may just be increased familiarity with the general process. There\'s no online lookup yet, but the author says he\'s considering adding the feature. It\'s still in the active development stage.
All three of these are Word add-ins and can – if you\'re careful – all be used together, so you can mix-and-match functions.
OmegaT is for OpenOffice files, basically, although you can convert Word files to OOo and then work on them in the program if you really want to use it. There are things to like about the program - for example, rather than piling up all the matches and dictionary meanings right in the work area, they are placed in a panel off to the right, where you can decide what you want to use and then paste it into the translation. (And in OpenOffice you can make pdf files, if that\'s something that sounds interesting.)
For now I\'m still playing around - I may end up using some combination of features from the Word add-on programs, with OmegaT for any OOo jobs that come in (none so far), or I may eventually go to one of the name brands. At the moment, the process is at least making work more interesting, and in some cases even faster and easier. - Judy Yeaton
▲ Collapse
| | | |
Jörgen wrote:
I am working on a large tagged Quark project, so far I have broken one tag translating in Wordfast, the editor has broken one using Trados. What exactly are those "superior" features ? I haven't done any real work with Trados myself, but I was given a short demo on the tagged files I was to work on, and I saw nothing that I wasn't used to seeing in Wordfast.
Well, obviously you're an advanced user and work very diligently. But it seems to me that Wordfast has no tag protection feature which Trados does have and which has proven to be a valuable aid in getting unexperienced translators to preserve tag integrity (and which your editor obviously turned off). Also, Trados allows for the agency to prep everything into one package and thereby ensure all the memories, glossaries and settings are set correctly on the translator's side.
That being said, advanced users on a budget might be bettter served with other tools. I somewhat like DejaVu myself, which I had the opportunity to extensively test a while back.
Benjamin
| | | | | 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 » Which CAT Tool is simple to use/learn to use and is an affordable price? | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news related to CAT tools
