Advantages of Studio 2014 over memoQ? Thread poster: Dominique Pivard
|
|---|
In another thread on another forum, Olly wrote:
I have both Studio and MemoQ: MemoQ does some things better but Studio has a couple of advantages that make it win the day for me in the end (but this has only been the case since the arrival of Studio 2014).
Just out of curiosity: what are these "couple of advantages"?
| | | | | Advantages of Studio | Apr 12, 2015 |
Hi Dominique,
The advantages are (in no particular order):
Studio's live preview in a wysiwyg environment as opposed to MemoQs html preview: I review my own work in the preview so that I can edit simultaneously; the Studio preview is the same as what you'd see if you reviewed the document with an MS office application (you do have to own MS office, and I understand no later than the 2011 version, so this advantage may yet come to lapse).
Capitalisation: I can't wo... See more Hi Dominique,
The advantages are (in no particular order):
Studio's live preview in a wysiwyg environment as opposed to MemoQs html preview: I review my own work in the preview so that I can edit simultaneously; the Studio preview is the same as what you'd see if you reviewed the document with an MS office application (you do have to own MS office, and I understand no later than the 2011 version, so this advantage may yet come to lapse).
Capitalisation: I can't work out why, but MemoQ's predictive typing function persistently ignores my choice of capital or lower-case letter, it doesn't matter which of the settings I select. It sounds very minor, but I find it extremely irritating.
Autosuggest dictionary: This is hard to pin down, but my impression is that Studio's autosuggest dictionaries provide many more useful suggestions than MemoQ's Muse. I'm a crap typist and so I can profit a lot from autosuggest/autocomplete/predictive typing/etc.
Files and folders: I can't make head or tail of MemoQ's directory structure and all those meaningless files in it. In Studios's project folders I can only see files that I can actually do something with: docs, xliffs, TMs, termbases, etc.
Clients: Several clients send me Studio packages. I know that MemoQ can officially handle them, but in my experience it does this painfully slowly and is not fail-safe.
Regards,
Olly ▲ Collapse
| | | | Wojciech_ (X)
Poland
Local time: 01:09
English to Polish
+ ...
| One, quite important feature | Apr 15, 2015 |
In Studio you can take advantage of its MT Autosuggest option, which is non-existent in MemoQ.
| | | | | Another comparison here | Apr 15, 2015 |
There are blogs and there are blogs...
But one of the few I really find worth following is Emma Goldsmith's.
She compares Studio 2014 and MemoQ here:
http://signsandsymptomsoftranslation.com/2014/08/08/memoq/
There is also a comparison of Studio 2014 with Déjà Vu, and lots more.
| | |
|
|
|
| Less blocking errors in MemoQ | Apr 16, 2015 |
I had studio 2009, 11 and now 14.
Same blocking errors occured in the 3 versions, like:
Object reference not set to an instance of an object / TM update failed
That put me in very bad position while translating offcially, with short deadlines.
These blocking errors were not fixed during 3 versions! the SDL KB proposes turnarounds which work sometimes but not a clean solution.
In Studio, the Java issue is unclear and too complex for a bas... See more I had studio 2009, 11 and now 14.
Same blocking errors occured in the 3 versions, like:
Object reference not set to an instance of an object / TM update failed
That put me in very bad position while translating offcially, with short deadlines.
These blocking errors were not fixed during 3 versions! the SDL KB proposes turnarounds which work sometimes but not a clean solution.
In Studio, the Java issue is unclear and too complex for a basic translator.
A lot of enhancements are made by using small additional programs; they are not integrated in the product. This makes processing very complex.
This is why I bought MemoQ. It is ergonomic, and it doesn't block you very often.
I use it when Trados is not strongly required by the client. MemoQ can generate Xliff bilingual files. TMs and TBs can coexist between both products.
Back to SDL Studio:
Multiterm is a terrible product, except perhaps in very complex cases which I never need.
I recognize that Studio's autosuggest is better, and the scope of specific file types is larger in Studio.
SDL Support made an effort in delivering an updated KB. (known error base).
Madeleine (: ▲ Collapse
| | | | Angela Malik 
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:09
German to English
+ ...
Olly Pekelharing wrote:
Capitalisation: I can't work out why, but MemoQ's predictive typing function persistently ignores my choice of capital or lower-case letter, it doesn't matter which of the settings I select. It sounds very minor, but I find it extremely irritating.
Autosuggest dictionary: This is hard to pin down, but my impression is that Studio's autosuggest dictionaries provide many more useful suggestions than MemoQ's Muse. I'm a crap typist and so I can profit a lot from autosuggest/autocomplete/predictive typing/etc.
Files and folders: I can't make head or tail of MemoQ's directory structure and all those meaningless files in it. In Studios's project folders I can only see files that I can actually do something with: docs, xliffs, TMs, termbases, etc.
Clients: Several clients send me Studio packages. I know that MemoQ can officially handle them, but in my experience it does this painfully slowly and is not fail-safe.
Same here on all of these counts. Also, I would add that MemoQ seems to be incredibly slow and I find the concordance function REALLY irritating to use. Also many times I have had consistency problems because the resources (TM etc.) don't seem to be working and I can't figure out why.
I did a job a few months ago in MemoQ and got really bad feedback for it, and a good portion of that I could directly attribute to MemoQ. It's put me off using it except for on really small jobs.
On Studio 2014:
I admit that my lack of familiarity with MemoQ is probably why I prefer Studio, but in general I find term recognition, concordance and autosuggest way better in Studio, and I really like that I can select all files, open for translation, and they open as a sort of "merged" file. Makes my life easier!
| | | | Francis Murphy (X)
Canada
Local time: 20:09
French to English
| My reasons for choosing MemoQ | Apr 16, 2015 |
I needed to choose my first CAT tool a few months ago. After experimenting and studying the latest versions of SDL Trados, MemoQ, Déjà Vu, Wordfast and Omega T, I chose MemoQ. Here's why:
NEW SALES: The clear leaders in new sales of product appear to be SDL and Kilgray's MemoQ. While some others such as Wordfast have significant market share and SDL has by far the largest share, MemoQ gaining steadily.
COMPANY. Kilgray seems to have a fast rate of growth in the past ... See more I needed to choose my first CAT tool a few months ago. After experimenting and studying the latest versions of SDL Trados, MemoQ, Déjà Vu, Wordfast and Omega T, I chose MemoQ. Here's why:
NEW SALES: The clear leaders in new sales of product appear to be SDL and Kilgray's MemoQ. While some others such as Wordfast have significant market share and SDL has by far the largest share, MemoQ gaining steadily.
COMPANY. Kilgray seems to have a fast rate of growth in the past three or four years and seems set to overtake SDL. Moreover, it is focused on success. It seems likely to still be around in 5 years or more -- and a capable development team is likely to still be in place. SDL has a history of acquisitions, leading to a collection of software from several different teams, now combined with some obvious compromises. Moreover, SDL's corporate core business is not software development for freelance translators. It is much broader and vulnerable to stock market pressures. Businesses and functions that are not performing can be spun off without much notice or future funding. On the other hand, Kilgray's founders remain in place (after about 10 years) and they worked as translators in their previous careers.
PRODUCT FEATURES. Although not quite as full-featured as SDL's product, MemoQ is closing the gap. MemoQ is sold relatively complete. When compared with a full set of features, MemoQ is better value (of late SDL seems to be offering deals, indicating they feel the heat from MemoQ).
PRODUCT QUALITY. In terms of trouble free operation, crashes and ease of licensing and upgrades, MemoQ is much better than SDL. Messing with computers is a major time-waster. I have a computer and software development background, but I haven't needed to use it to work with MemoQ. I would definitely need to use it working with SDL, based on the comments I see. We don't get paid for messing with software problems. We get paid for words translated.
SUPPORT. Based on forum comments and various websites, SDL has a long history of weak and expensive support. MemoQ seems to require much less support and fixes seem to be implemented regularly (in fact, optional upgrades with fixes are distributed monthly and essentially self-install).
SPEED. This is important for everyone. My approach is to use the fastest hardware I can afford. I use an HP Envy 17" laptop with an Intel Core i7 processor and 12 GB of RAM running Windows 8.1. A good software program needs to be able to take advantage of good hardware. MemoQ does that. When compared to SDL, hardware can make up for certain SDL speed advantages. On the other hand, installation difficulties and crashes experienced with SDL are software-based problems.
PRICE. All of the software packages are relatively cheap when one considers the work they do. Price was not a factor for me, although it would have been had SDL kept pricing up where it was earlier. A high enough price and healthy growth are essential to ensure that the development team remains in place and that the software remains technically competitive.
LIFESPAN. I based my decision on shooting for at least five years of use of a given package. This allows efficiencies, provided the software releases remain features-competitive.
UPGRADES. MemoQ has a clear and simple policy for upgrades. It is quite feasible to pay the annual fee to always have the latest version.
SHAKEOUT. A shakeout is what happens when there are too many players competing for the same market and undercutting each other on price. Most players are losing money and only the best products and best-financed survive. A shakeout in this software is inevitable, as the leaders add more features and as translation becomes more automated. My guess is that MemoQ will be a winner. I am not so certain about the others.
THE FUTURE. My guess is that the advantages in features and performance of SDL, compared with MemoQ, will disappear over the next year or two, leaving MemoQ with a clear technical lead.
[Edited at 2015-04-16 16:54 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Advantages of Studio 2014 over memoQ? | 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 » |
| | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news related to CAT tools
