| موضوع میں صفحات: [1 2] > | Wordfast or Trados دھاگا پوسٹ کرنے والے: Owen Witesman
|
|---|
An eternal question. I have 0 experience with Trados. I use a demo copy of Wordfast. I am a translator of an obscure combination (FI-EN) who almost never encounters a repeat sentence. Only once have I ever hit the segment limit on the demo Wordfast. Is there anything that Trados will do for me that Wordfast doesn't or would Trados just be a waste of money?
[Edited at 2006-12-08 18:49]
| | | | Marc P (X) 
Local time: 22:42
انگریزیسےجرمن
+ ...
| Concordance function | Dec 8, 2006 |
Do you make use of the concordance function to find terminology from past projects?
Marc
| | | |
waste of money
if you (as you say) hardly ever meet same word string again, there is no practical difference between the programs for you.
One feature may be mostly useful for you - concordance search within unlimited number of monolingual files. Wordfast has it, Trados not.
[Edited at 2006-12-08 19:51]
| | | |
Trados (via TagEditor) is much much better at handling tagged files. I use wordfast for the grand majority of my projects, but I bought TRADOS and haven't regretted it for xml and PPT files.
If your response to this is "What's a tagged file?" then stick to wordfast.
Good luck!
| | |
|
|
|
Vito Smolej
جرمنی
Local time: 22:42
رکن (2004)
سلوویائیسےانگریزی
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | play by the ear | Dec 8, 2006 |
If I understand you correctly, Id say, theres no need to solve future problems right now (g). If you want to play safe, get wordfast. If you REALLY want to play safe, get TRADOS, even if you dont see any need for it. It may make a good impression with some (apparent) big cheese. HOwever, in your situation, both Wordfast and TRADOS would be more of a marketing gig ("hey, guys, I got TRADOS!") than a response to a real need.
Mind you, in both cases you do get a definite advantage aga... See more If I understand you correctly, Id say, theres no need to solve future problems right now (g). If you want to play safe, get wordfast. If you REALLY want to play safe, get TRADOS, even if you dont see any need for it. It may make a good impression with some (apparent) big cheese. HOwever, in your situation, both Wordfast and TRADOS would be more of a marketing gig ("hey, guys, I got TRADOS!") than a response to a real need.
Mind you, in both cases you do get a definite advantage against any competition through the amassed translational memory. But, you can do that at no charge by using OmegaT for instance. TRADOS - and/or Wordfast - with their brand names can follow later.
regards
smo ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Use all the currently accessible features to your advantage | Dec 8, 2006 |
I don't use Trados so I can't speak about it.
However, the more I use Wordfast, the more I learn about it and the more useful it proves.
If you keep using the demo version, you can make the best of some important features such as glossaries or control+alt+N which searches through all the files present in the folder you designate.
However, if you buy the full version, you can put all your translations in a single TM and although you may not often find matche... See more I don't use Trados so I can't speak about it.
However, the more I use Wordfast, the more I learn about it and the more useful it proves.
If you keep using the demo version, you can make the best of some important features such as glossaries or control+alt+N which searches through all the files present in the folder you designate.
However, if you buy the full version, you can put all your translations in a single TM and although you may not often find matches, you can do a context search which will help you see how you translated a phrase or word in the past. Highlight the result, press Alt+F12 and it is pasted, unformatted, at the end of the current segment. That can be quite useful.
You can also program Wordfast to search the word you highlight in a dictionary or an online database.
Personally, I was using the demo version until I got a 15-page exam with multiple choices. That contract alone justified buying the licence, and I haven't regretted it. You may want to wait for something like that to occur. Most matches will come up within the same document.
In other words, read the manual and make the most of the features you can now access and one day, you'll get the perfect contract and you'll just know you need the full version! However, if you don't find Wordfast useful, I doubt you'd find the more expensive Trados any more useful.
Alexandre ▲ Collapse
| | | | Heinrich Pesch
فن لینڈ
Local time: 23:42
رکن (2003)
جرمنسےفینیائی
+ ...
| Matches depend on the text category | Dec 9, 2006 |
In patents or technical translations you will get matches all the time, even from years back, if you can keep the TM large enough. But the free Wf-version is limited to 500 TUs, so I would advise you to get the license of Wf at least.
This is the same for all languages, also Finnish
This year's update of SDL Trados includes both SDLX and Trados, so its a good bargain. But soon there will be a new version ... See more In patents or technical translations you will get matches all the time, even from years back, if you can keep the TM large enough. But the free Wf-version is limited to 500 TUs, so I would advise you to get the license of Wf at least.
This is the same for all languages, also Finnish
This year's update of SDL Trados includes both SDLX and Trados, so its a good bargain. But soon there will be a new version out, I guess, and in your situation I might wait a few months befor ordering Trados.
Wf context search = Trados concordance search.
With Trados you have to keep Workbench open, and the search result either are displayed behind you Word-window or you need a second screen, or you reserve a lot of space for WB. I only use Trados if I have to.
Cheers
Heinrich ▲ Collapse
| | | | Richard Benham
فرانس
Local time: 22:42
انگریزیسےجرمن
+ ...
میموریم میں | My experiences | Dec 9, 2006 |
I have and use both Wordfast and Trados. Maybe because I got it first, I find Wordfast easier to use. I actually regret upgrading to the latest version of Wordfast, however; while there are some improvements, a few features I liked seem to have disappears and it seems to have got a lot worse at handling tagged files.
While I generally find Wordfast easier to use, Trados has some useful features that it lacks, such as highlighting the differences between source segments in the case o... See more I have and use both Wordfast and Trados. Maybe because I got it first, I find Wordfast easier to use. I actually regret upgrading to the latest version of Wordfast, however; while there are some improvements, a few features I liked seem to have disappears and it seems to have got a lot worse at handling tagged files.
While I generally find Wordfast easier to use, Trados has some useful features that it lacks, such as highlighting the differences between source segments in the case of partial matches. There are costs too, such, as has already been mentioned, having to keep TWB open while translating a Word file.
The bottom line, however, is that I got a big job (or series of jobs) from a client who expected me to use Trados. While I could cope using Wordfast for a while, converting TMs back and forth got a bit wearing (and sometimes one program or the other would hang in the process). Also, as I already had SDLX, I was able to take advantage of the cheap upgrade offer.
On the subject of SDLX, I still use it for PPT files and a few other things. It is a bit of a change from the other two, but it has its advantages too. It is apparently impossible to import Wordfast TMs to SDLX directly, but easy to convert Wordfast TMs via Excel to a format SDLX will handle (and vice versa). This gets around the problem of Wordfast occasionally hanging when asked to produce TMX-formatted TMs. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Mihai Badea (X)
لکزمبرگ
رومانیائیسےانگریزی
+ ...
| Wordfast and Trados | Dec 9, 2006 |
I don't have repetitive texts very often, but I find CAT tools particularly useful due to their context search function. Sometimes, you can't remember how you translated a term in a previous translation and a CAT tool makes it very easy to retrieve that term.
Between Trados and Wordfast, I prefer the latter. I find it more user-friendly (although, it took me some time to find out how I could merge two TMs ).
Richard Benham wrote:
While I generally find Wordfast easier to use, Trados has some useful features that it lacks, such as highlighting the differences between source segments in the case of partial matches.
Have you tried the Ctrl+Alt+M combination to highlight differences in fuzzy matches? It works for me.
[Edited at 2006-12-09 18:38]
| | | | | Whole sentence repetition | Dec 12, 2006 |
[quote]Owen Witesman wrote:
I am a translator of an obscure combination (FI-EN) who almost never encounters a repeat sentence. Is there anything that Trados will do for me that Wordfast doesn't or would Trados just be a waste of money?
With the possible exception of some technical manuals or similar material, whole sentences are rarely repeated within a document, or from one document to another. This is where Trados has always fallen down.
Recurring sub-sentence portions (terminology and phrases) of 5 words or less, are, however, much more frequent (even in Finnish) and can sometimes account for 50% of the content of documents. With its three glossaries and ease of adding terms on the fly, Wordfast outperforms Trados in this respect but still remains inferior to Déjà Vu DVX which can autoassemble such repetitive portions and use example-based machine translation to increase a translator's productivity and consistency.
David Turner
[Edited at 2006-12-12 15:06]
| | | | | Trados or Wordfast, why not Metatexis? | Dec 13, 2006 |
I was asking for some guidance about these tools in last days, and I found the following:
Metatexis works with Trados files, Trados is rather expensive and Wordfast do the same that Trados, you should pay to Wordfast for three years and renew again the licence. Metatexis is very particular give you six free months for trial with all the capabilites, after six months you decide if bought it or not. The diference is price, the online rates regarding these three tool are in pro of Me... See more I was asking for some guidance about these tools in last days, and I found the following:
Metatexis works with Trados files, Trados is rather expensive and Wordfast do the same that Trados, you should pay to Wordfast for three years and renew again the licence. Metatexis is very particular give you six free months for trial with all the capabilites, after six months you decide if bought it or not. The diference is price, the online rates regarding these three tool are in pro of Metatexis.
[Edited at 2006-12-13 18:12] ▲ Collapse
| | | | NMR (X)
فرانس
Local time: 22:42
ڈچسےفرانسیسی
+ ...
| Wordfast, of course, in combination with a desktop search tool | Dec 16, 2006 |
Owen Witesman wrote:
I am a translator of an obscure combination (FI-EN) who almost never encounters a repeat sentence.
Most projects are repetive after some time, even in obscure language pairs. I am just now on a guide of 10,000 words I translated last year, but I did not give the TM to the client, and half of it is popping up in green. I don't need anything else than Wordfast. Sometimes I send an uncleaned file to the clients, but most of them even don't know that I have this tool. I use the context function all the time, and if I need ideas, I look on my computer with Copernic, a free desktop search tool.
| | |
|
|
|
Vito Smolej
جرمنی
Local time: 22:42
رکن (2004)
سلوویائیسےانگریزی
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | Factually incorrect... | Dec 26, 2006 |
...One feature may be mostly useful for you - concordance search within unlimited number of monolingual files. Wordfast has it, Trados not.
...because both Trados and Wordfast deal with bilingual files. What was meant was Id assume the limitation Trados has in terms of translation memories that can be used in one single pretranslate session (two vs more than two in the case of Wordfast).
The case is weak: having a specialized TM (#1) and all-of-them TM (#2 - I name them "Full Monty" like "EN - SL full monty";) ) in Trados effectively neutralizes the argument.
Whatever the pros and cons, concordance search is what makes these two competitors tick (and some of the rest not).
Regards
[Edited at 2006-12-26 23:19]
| | | | | Basic function | Dec 27, 2006 |
Whatever the pros and cons, concordance search is what makes these two competitors tick (and some of the rest not).
I think you'll find that most CAT tools have this standard database lookup function: OmegaT, MetaTexis, Similis, Multitrans, Transit, DVX, to name but a few. It's a very basic feature that doesn't really differ all that much from one product to another.
David Turner
[Edited at 2006-12-27 14:01]
| | | | sylver
Local time: 04:42
فرانسیسیسےانگریزی
| Concordance vs context search | Mar 30, 2007 |
David and Vito, it looks like you are both confusing "concordance search" and "context search".
Context search is implemented one way or another in most tools.
Concordance is a feature I have seen only in Wordfast and which consists of searching through all the files of a reference folder for a word or a search expression and returning all results with the surrounding paragraph.
It was intended for monolingual documents but I found it very useful to add ... See more David and Vito, it looks like you are both confusing "concordance search" and "context search".
Context search is implemented one way or another in most tools.
Concordance is a feature I have seen only in Wordfast and which consists of searching through all the files of a reference folder for a word or a search expression and returning all results with the surrounding paragraph.
It was intended for monolingual documents but I found it very useful to add all my relevant glossaries to the reference folder, as it provides a way to quickly find all instances of a specific word on an unlimited number of glossaries, with a Ms Word shortcut. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | موضوع میں صفحات: [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 » Wordfast or Trados | 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 » |
| | LinguaCore | AI Translation at Your Fingertips
The underlying LLM technology of LinguaCore offers AI translations of unprecedented quality. Quick and simple. Add a human linguistic review at the end for expert-level quality at a fraction of the cost and time.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news related to CAT tools
