Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: End client Looking for feedback and information on investing in a CAT
Poster: Dan Lucas
Post title: Neither In-house nor Third-party
[quote]Stacie Hiscock wrote:
I am investigating the benefits of investing in our own CAT tool.[/quote]
I appreciate that you have taken the trouble to venture into the lion's den and bounce these questions off the community. It's not clear from the above whether you are referring to developing a CAT tool in-house or deploying an existing third-party tool chain available on the open market.
I'll keep it short: as a full-time, professional freelance technical translator I strongly prefer that my clients do not mandate anything. I have my own tools and workflows. Let's agree on a rate and a deadline and get down to work.
If you mandate a proprietary in-house tool, I will either charge you more or decline to do business with your organisation. Learning any unfamiliar interface takes time. If it is the interface for an in-house tool I will never be able to apply my knowledge of that interface to the work of another client. Moreover, I have never seen an in-house tool that can match the sophistication of the leading CAT tools. The ones I have used are clunky and well behind the curve in technical terms.
Both of the above factors imply lower efficiency. Lower efficiency means fewer words per day. Fewer words per day means lower income. That's not an attractive proposition for most freelancers.
If you mandate a tool provided by SDL, Star, Kilgray, Atril etc. you will still discourage those translators who do not use whatever tool it is that you chose. While SDL is probably the leader, it does not appear to me to be dominant, so if you choose SDL then you'll provoke sighs of exasperation from the MemoQ users (or vice versa) and indeed those who don't habitually use CAT tools at all. Having said that, any of the above would be better than an in-house tool.
Bear in mind the possibility of unintended consequences. Your organisation works in a very technical area and I'm betting that the pool of competent linguist talent is already shallow. The question I would ask is whether you really want to reduce it further by providing a disincentive for freelancers to work with you.
Again, thank you for at least taking the time to ask.
Regards
Dan
Topic: End client Looking for feedback and information on investing in a CAT
Poster: Dan Lucas
Post title: Neither In-house nor Third-party
[quote]Stacie Hiscock wrote:
I am investigating the benefits of investing in our own CAT tool.[/quote]
I appreciate that you have taken the trouble to venture into the lion's den and bounce these questions off the community. It's not clear from the above whether you are referring to developing a CAT tool in-house or deploying an existing third-party tool chain available on the open market.
I'll keep it short: as a full-time, professional freelance technical translator I strongly prefer that my clients do not mandate anything. I have my own tools and workflows. Let's agree on a rate and a deadline and get down to work.
If you mandate a proprietary in-house tool, I will either charge you more or decline to do business with your organisation. Learning any unfamiliar interface takes time. If it is the interface for an in-house tool I will never be able to apply my knowledge of that interface to the work of another client. Moreover, I have never seen an in-house tool that can match the sophistication of the leading CAT tools. The ones I have used are clunky and well behind the curve in technical terms.
Both of the above factors imply lower efficiency. Lower efficiency means fewer words per day. Fewer words per day means lower income. That's not an attractive proposition for most freelancers.
If you mandate a tool provided by SDL, Star, Kilgray, Atril etc. you will still discourage those translators who do not use whatever tool it is that you chose. While SDL is probably the leader, it does not appear to me to be dominant, so if you choose SDL then you'll provoke sighs of exasperation from the MemoQ users (or vice versa) and indeed those who don't habitually use CAT tools at all. Having said that, any of the above would be better than an in-house tool.
Bear in mind the possibility of unintended consequences. Your organisation works in a very technical area and I'm betting that the pool of competent linguist talent is already shallow. The question I would ask is whether you really want to reduce it further by providing a disincentive for freelancers to work with you.
Again, thank you for at least taking the time to ask.
Regards
Dan