| Pages in topic: < [1 2] | Switching to Studio 2011 - What to be aware of? Thread poster: 564354352 (X)
|
|---|
564354352 (X) 
Denmark
Local time: 10:22
Danish to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Seems worth a try | Jul 23, 2012 |
I'm really grateful for all the comments, they are all very helpful.
As I understand it now, it's a question of getting used to a new program entirely (although I expect that any experience with CAT tools, including old Trados, will always be an advantage) and then just 'getting on with it'. And once you learn the ropes, and provided you like the interface, it's a time-saver, especially with more complicated text formats, and with the benefit of a number of additional features that ... See more I'm really grateful for all the comments, they are all very helpful.
As I understand it now, it's a question of getting used to a new program entirely (although I expect that any experience with CAT tools, including old Trados, will always be an advantage) and then just 'getting on with it'. And once you learn the ropes, and provided you like the interface, it's a time-saver, especially with more complicated text formats, and with the benefit of a number of additional features that e.g. Suite 2007 does not have.
Thanks, all... For the sake of progress, I will definitely have to give it a go, but will choose the timing carefully, allowing for a bit of trial and error along the way.
And, if it turns out to be more hazzle than fun, then I'll definitely Dominique's suggestion in mind.
Happy translating, folks 
[Edited at 2012-07-23 05:07 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Clarifications.. | Jul 26, 2012 |
Gitte Hovedskov Hansen wrote: From what I gather from comments from Emma and Enrico (thanks for those), the real value of Studio 2011 is that it handles formats-other-than-Word quite well and that this is where time can really be saved. That is very useful knowledge (to me extra useful, because I don't have much work in such formats). The autopropagation and autosuggest features sound like interesting stuff, which I will definitely look closely at when I start experimenting with Studio 2011. Just to clarify, I already own Studio 2011 as well as Suite 2007, so I have no fear of losing my licence, Mike, and as Paul has clarified, this should not be an issue anyhow. In terms of support agreements... I can understand your rage, Enrico, because it does seem very expensive (I think for SDL Trados it's something like 25 % of the purchase value of your entire program package - per year), although future version upgrades are included in that (not just the free SPs and other minor bug fixes). I'm not sure it's relevant that it becomes even more expensive if you work with many different CAT tools, as that is your choice, not the software supplier's problem. Again, as I have said, I am pleasantly surprised at discovering that SDL are quite willing to help resolve program-related issues for free as and when it fits into their other work. And Enrico, as you are trying out various CAT tools, I would highly recommend that you subscribe to the (free) monthly newsletter The Toolbox Newsletter written by Jost Zetzsche. You can find a link to subscription here: http://www.internationalwriters.com/toolkit/ In fact, I recommend this newsletter to all translators who are interested in all the software aspects of translation. [Edited at 2012-07-21 09:33 GMT]
Hi Gitte,
And thanks for the amount of suggestions. But let me clarify one point, which i deem important. I don't find it any strange that a company asks to pay for support and assistance. What i find strange is that, assuming i can use the software, and the software works well, there should not be a need to ask for support. Now what is happening in the case of Studio is that the software is buggy and each time i find an issue, i need to A) Buy support to find ways around the bugs or B) dig into forums. That is my only objection. I could spend time explaining why, as a customer, i find this disappointing, adding up the many reasons that led me to have this opinion on the attitude SDL has towards this specific aspect. It's not a matter of price. It's the principle that's wrong. It's as if i went to buy a defective car and the dealer asks me to pay for the car's issues blaming me i can't drive, or assuming so. It's true they help sometimes, Paul first in line. But there should be a way to contact them directly for software related bugs and that should be fixed for free with a mix of patches and technical help. Then, if i need more support for my gaps, or i need to be Trados certified...i buy the package. That is my principle. As it is now i had issues with both Studios and those were never solved. One didn't even get 1 reply in the technical section, while in the second case i did get some feedback but had already lost 2 jobs due to incompatibilities between Trados/SDL CATs. Had i had proper technical advice perhaps i'd have saved the projects and kept one customer who decided to migrate elsewhere because tired of incompatibilities.
This leads us to the topic i stated last time. Since Studio to date is not a one-stop-shop solution, requiring people to have not only multiple platforms from the same maker but also platforms from other makers to make up for the bugs and the gaps (I still can't merge sentences properly and can't really manipulate the source text as i do in TagEditor, i can't still create a MT glossary from the Studio interface but have to waste time opening MT, and much else), it's simply unreasonable to have to buy a support agreement. That is the logic behind my statements. I am not even in rage (i am past that stage...that was when SDL bought Trados and the support attitude had a sudden change). I am simply stating you can't make me pay to fix your bugs. If you can fix them when i pay, why didn't you sell the software already fixed instead of making me waste so much time and even pay twice for it (Software + support). That's it in short.
All that said, all what i stated before still applies. When the CAT works it's worth every single Euro, at least for the type of jobs i handle.
[Edited at 2012-07-26 14:06 GMT]
| | | | | Further clarification | Jul 26, 2012 |
SDL Support wrote: Enrico C - ECLC wrote: MikeTrans wrote:
.....
Unfortunately, by upgrading to Trados Studio 2011, you will most probably lose your license for Trados 2007 (also including SDLX), or you will have to pay an extra license fee.
.... It also means the day a customer asks me to work with 2009 i will have to "re-buy" the license for what is, maybe, just a job that has to be done just not to lose the customer. I forgot this aspect, which is even more disappointing than the support thing. Thanks Mike for bringing it up. More infos on this can be found here http://www.proz.com/forum/sdl_trados_support/229223-why_have_sdl_taken_back_my_license_for_sdl_trados_studio_2009.html. Hi, I'd like to make a couple of things clear in case concerned users get the wrong idea from some of these posts. The first thing is that if you upgrade from Trados 2007 to Studio 2011 you will not lose your license for 2007. The process is pretty clear, there are links in the "My Account" area, on this forum (at the top as a sticky) and in the Knowledgebase that make it clear your 2007 version will be upgraded to 2007 Suite and you will also get Studio 2011. The process asks you to return your 2007 license because you are then provided with new ones for 2007 Suite and 2011: http://kb.sdl.com/kb/article?ArticleId=3927&source=Article&c=12&cid=23 The post that Enrico refers to about having to purchase 2009 again seems to have more information about not needing 2009 if you have 2011. There are some circumstances where you may need 2009, such as when your customer prepares a Project package using custom xml files for example. But these can still be translated, the problem would be that you may not be able to save the target files yourself. The return package would not present this problem for your customer. If there are concerns over this and if you have specific examples of where you do not think it works please let me know. You may be right... but if we can review this with specific reasons rather than a general worry it will help us to address them as needed. Regards Paul
Hi Paul
I think we already discussed this in my other thread relating to files incompatibilities between SDL CATS, but perhaps it's worth explaining again. As discussed other times, the compatibility between Trados/SDL CATs is quite relative. I had customer creating jobs with 2007 that wouldn't work with 2009 SP3 or 2011 SP1; i had jobs created for 2009 that wouldn't work with 2011. And the most recent cases (where you offered to help) are those in which files created with 2007 to be done with 2009 would not open neither with 2007, nor with 2009 nor with 2011 but only with another CAT. Now starting from this point, my reasoning is that the day i will have to format my PC, or change PC, my license for Studio 2009 will not be valid anymore (that was my understanding). This means also that, in a scenario where a customer asks me to perform a job with 2009 or where i can't open files with 2011 that would open with 2009 i would have to rebuy the license. Of course this would be a non-existent issue in a scenario where i only need one CAT (The latest version normally) to perform my work, since i could gladly trash the old software, without even needing to return a license i don't need anymore, but unfortunately to date it has not been so, since i am still using 2007 to edit the source with the freedom i need, and i am still merging segments manually or with endless tricks (Notepad, TagEditor etc.)
In a normal situation there should not be the need to even discuss this because the newer software would simply supersede the old obsolete ones without all these incompatibilities.
Please correct me if i am wrong on the licenses and on the rest.
| | | | 564354352 (X)
Denmark
Local time: 10:22
Danish to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Paying for support | Jul 27, 2012 |
Hi again Enrico
I agree with you that it hardly seems fair if you have to pay for bugs in a program you have already paid a lot of money for. Such problems should be fixed for free, and the software provider should just be grateful that you point out flaws in their programming so that they can improve their products for the benefit of all.
When I was an employee for an agency that had a support agreement with SDL, the vast majority of the issues we needed support on wer... See more Hi again Enrico
I agree with you that it hardly seems fair if you have to pay for bugs in a program you have already paid a lot of money for. Such problems should be fixed for free, and the software provider should just be grateful that you point out flaws in their programming so that they can improve their products for the benefit of all.
When I was an employee for an agency that had a support agreement with SDL, the vast majority of the issues we needed support on were initial installation issues (which SDL, to the best of my knowledge, do not charge for) related to making the different licences work together in a network, and urgent issues to do with specific files, i.e. not bugs related to the programs, but problems caused by the format/layout etc. of source files.
I am not defending the high cost of support agreements at all, I just imagine that it can be difficult to produce software that takes into account any and all kinds of issues that may be caused by the creation of a great variety of document formats at a multitude of document makers' end.
Gitte ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| No autoconcordance | Jul 31, 2012 |
Hi, Gitte
The "Start concordance search if no segment match is found" option is missing from Studio. This alone is putting me off migrating altogether until SDL adds this feature.
Regards,
Valeria
| | | | 564354352 (X)
Denmark
Local time: 10:22
Danish to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Autoconcordance | Jul 31, 2012 |
Hi Valeria
Can't you just change the match value in your settings (as you can in Suite 2007)?
I mean, wouldn't that give you the same result as the autoconcordance in earlier versions? I.e. the autoconcordance would only kick in if no fuzzy match was found at the min. value you have chosen.
Or am I missing a point here?
Gitte
| | | | | No native SGML support | Aug 2, 2012 |
Be aware of the fact that it doesn't natively support opening SGML files. Most of the time in software, an upgrade over a previous version doesn't remove functionality, this one has.
| | | |
Hi,
SGML is not an "out of the box" filetype in 2007 either. So if you happen to have an ini file that has been prepared for sgml then you can use this to recreate the filter in Studio. No difference.
In fact if you have a few files and the ini I'll happily do this and test it for you?
Regards
Paul
[Edited at 2012-08-03 09:51 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| It's not a matter of the .ini/filetype | Aug 3, 2012 |
SDL Support wrote:
Hi,
SGML is not an "out of the box" filetype in 2007 either. So if you happen to have an ini file that has been prepared for sgml then you can use this to recreate the filter in Studio. No difference.
In fact if you have a few files and the ini I'll happily do this and test it for you?
Regards
Paul
[Edited at 2012-08-03 09:51 GMT]
Thanks for your reply, Paul, but it's not a matter of the .ini and its conversion. I've done that already. The fact of the matter is that TagEditor (part of Trados 2007), once you have your .ini file loaded, does in fact support going to the file menu, picking "Open," browsing for your file and voilà, starting to work on it. The same cannot be said for Studio 2011--from what I gather there's the extra step now of converting your .sgm files to .ttx files first, either with Trados 2007 or with something called TTX-It, adding a step to the process. Does 2011 at least "save target as" .sgm, or is there another previously unnecessary step involved?
Unless Studio 2011 has a subprogram similar to TagEditor in 2007, I'm afraid my company has just bought itself having to do more work to get the same results.
| | | | | Maybe you used xml? | Aug 3, 2012 |
PapagenoX wrote:
Thanks for your reply, Paul, but it's not a matter of the .ini and its conversion. I've done that already. The fact of the matter is that TagEditor (part of Trados 2007), once you have your .ini file loaded, does in fact support going to the file menu, picking "Open," browsing for your file and voilà, starting to work on it. The same cannot be said for Studio 2011--from what I gather there's the extra step now of converting your .sgm files to .ttx files first, either with Trados 2007 or with something called TTX-It, adding a step to the process. Does 2011 at least "save target as" .sgm, or is there another previously unnecessary step involved?
Unless Studio 2011 has a subprogram similar to TagEditor in 2007, I'm afraid my company has just bought itself having to do more work to get the same results.
Hi,
Perhaps you created an xml filetype instead of html? You should be able to create a new filetype, base this on html rather than xml, then select the sgml ini when given the opportunity through the wizard. This way you can then open your sgml files directly in Studio and translate them without having to go through TTX first.
As I said, if you you have the ini and a couple of sgml files I'll be happy to take a look at this for you?
Regards
Paul
[email protected]
| | | | | OK, will send files via email | Aug 3, 2012 |
SDL Support wrote: Hi, Perhaps you created an xml filetype instead of html? You should be able to create a new filetype, base this on html rather than xml, then select the sgml ini when given the opportunity through the wizard. This way you can then open your sgml files directly in Studio and translate them without having to go through TTX first. As I said, if you you have the ini and a couple of sgml files I'll be happy to take a look at this for you? Regards Paul [email protected]
OK, Paul, it's very possible that I didn't convert the .ini file correctly. I'll send you an .ini (UTF-8 encoded) via email from jose.hulse@ (domain withheld) .com plus an .sgm file and perhaps you can work your magic on it and let me know the proper steps involved in converting an .ini. It seems strange to me to need to pick HTML as the basis of conversion, since HTML is a subset of SGML.
Thanks for your help,
José aka PapagenoX
| | | | | Paul helped me out, but I still have questions | Aug 6, 2012 |
Paul helped me figure out how to convert my .ini files to filetypes and we've managed to open one file, but I still have a couple of issues--anyone with insight is welcome to comment.
1) The "translate to fuzzy match" equivalent command, as well as the two others at the bottom of the Translate menu, are grayed out and I can't figure out why--a pretty important issue to resolve.
2) Where do the new "filetype" files reside so we can copy them to different computers, and w... See more Paul helped me figure out how to convert my .ini files to filetypes and we've managed to open one file, but I still have a couple of issues--anyone with insight is welcome to comment.
1) The "translate to fuzzy match" equivalent command, as well as the two others at the bottom of the Translate menu, are grayed out and I can't figure out why--a pretty important issue to resolve.
2) Where do the new "filetype" files reside so we can copy them to different computers, and what is their extension? ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
564354352 (X)
Denmark
Local time: 10:22
Danish to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Over to Papagenox | Aug 7, 2012 |
Just thought I'd comment here, as I started this thread - but this entire discussion is a bit beyond me, so I will leave it to Papagenox and Paul to continue their exchanges (or not, if they are done).
Thanks for all the comments/views.
Gitte
| | | | | SP2 or ??? MemoQ | Aug 7, 2012 |
I felt very much like you, but have ended up with Studio 2011 and SP2.
I still have one client who has not upgraded from Workbench 2007, but I have converted all his TMs to Studio, and instead of sending him uncleaned files, I send a .tmx and the target Word file. He has to run his system with most EU languages, and that solution is quite compatible.
Setting up is not really more difficult than setting up projects in the 'old' system, although it feels different at firs... See more I felt very much like you, but have ended up with Studio 2011 and SP2.
I still have one client who has not upgraded from Workbench 2007, but I have converted all his TMs to Studio, and instead of sending him uncleaned files, I send a .tmx and the target Word file. He has to run his system with most EU languages, and that solution is quite compatible.
Setting up is not really more difficult than setting up projects in the 'old' system, although it feels different at first.
I have several templates for different scenarios/clients, and can often choose one of those, or re-use an earlier project for the same client. Simply remove or ignore completed files and add new ones, and off you go.
I think the splitting and merging segments bug has been fixed, or at least greatly improved in Studio 2011 and SP2. I once had to get the Hotline to sort out a big file for me with Studio 2009... NOT FUNNY!!
For me Multiterm is the primary reason for staying with Trados. The Wordfast Classic glossary function just did not work satisfactorily for me, plus the fact that the best client glossary I have is in Multiterm format. It works, and as you say, if it ain't broke... I can't work without it on some jobs for that client. I also have my own Multiterm glossaries, with notes and so on...
I was never convinced that the concordance worked as well in Wordfast either. Sometimes you have to update TMs with Studio before the concordance works, but then it does.
Having more or less dropped Workbench and come as far as I have with Studio 2011, I am really happy with it. I have a Service Agreement, which means I get all the updates plus hotline help for the one annual subscription. I will probably stay with it for the foreseeable future.
__________________
This summer I went to an introductory workshop on MemoQ. I was quite impressed, and there is some serious competition there. If I had been starting out, and not familiar with Studio, I would really consider it, and I am not sure which I would choose, but I am not convinced I need both!
MemoQ has AutoCorrect, which I miss in Studio, being a hopeles typist. But otherwise the competition is so fierce that both are pretty good. Try the 45-day demo version and see if that suits you. Lots of people are happy with it, and it is supposed to be compatible with other CATs.
And best of luck! ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Switching to Studio 2011 - What to be aware of? | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
| | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news related to SDL Trados
