Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Why are more and more agencies these days choosing memoQ or SDL Studio as their "preferred" tool?
Poster: Samuel Murray
Post title: Yes, those e-mails...
[quote]Michael Beijer wrote:
Why are more and more agencies sending me stupid emails like this these days? [/quote]
I've had agencies announce their allegiance with other tools as well. I adapt to it by CAT hopping. If hopping is not possible, I politely tell the client that I can't use that tool but that they're welcome to use my services. Sometimes then they find ways to accommodate me.
MemoQ is pretty easy to CAT hop, as it has a fairly robust bilingual review export format, and clients seem to have no trouble figuring out how it works. It's not as sturdy as Wordfast Pro 3, but miles better than that of Trados 2009+. In fact, the Trados bilingual review roundtrip is so unreliable that when a Trados client sends me an export DOCX, I ask them to send me the SDLXLIFF instead (which I then translate in Wordfast Classic).
[quote]Michael Beijer wrote:
That is: why do agencies (often once they reach a certain size) often decide to select a preferred CAT tool and enforce its use? [/quote]
Simple: the PMs need to support the tool(s) translators use, and it's easier to support one tool, and it's more productive to support one tool very well than to support several tools poorly. These CAT tools (MemoQ and Trados 2009+) also have many integrated services that PMs can use to automate things (i.e. make it simpler for themselves). I think most translators will choose to adapt to the agency. If you choose not to, then you'll be one of only a few, and that shouldn't be too much of a burden, so try it.
[Edited at 2015-11-13 20:21 GMT]
Topic: Why are more and more agencies these days choosing memoQ or SDL Studio as their "preferred" tool?
Poster: Samuel Murray
Post title: Yes, those e-mails...
[quote]Michael Beijer wrote:
Why are more and more agencies sending me stupid emails like this these days? [/quote]
I've had agencies announce their allegiance with other tools as well. I adapt to it by CAT hopping. If hopping is not possible, I politely tell the client that I can't use that tool but that they're welcome to use my services. Sometimes then they find ways to accommodate me.
MemoQ is pretty easy to CAT hop, as it has a fairly robust bilingual review export format, and clients seem to have no trouble figuring out how it works. It's not as sturdy as Wordfast Pro 3, but miles better than that of Trados 2009+. In fact, the Trados bilingual review roundtrip is so unreliable that when a Trados client sends me an export DOCX, I ask them to send me the SDLXLIFF instead (which I then translate in Wordfast Classic).
[quote]Michael Beijer wrote:
That is: why do agencies (often once they reach a certain size) often decide to select a preferred CAT tool and enforce its use? [/quote]
Simple: the PMs need to support the tool(s) translators use, and it's easier to support one tool, and it's more productive to support one tool very well than to support several tools poorly. These CAT tools (MemoQ and Trados 2009+) also have many integrated services that PMs can use to automate things (i.e. make it simpler for themselves). I think most translators will choose to adapt to the agency. If you choose not to, then you'll be one of only a few, and that shouldn't be too much of a burden, so try it.
[Edited at 2015-11-13 20:21 GMT]