Forum: XTM Cloud support
Topic: What is your opinion on XTM Cloud CAT tool?
Poster: jensskarpe
Post title: XTM gettign bigger due to mergers
Hi all, very interesting discussion.
I am not very active here, but wanted to try to add to the discussion. Due to the latest mergers in the translations bussiness it is my experience/feeling that XTM is getting much more common, and I hate it!
Personally I will definately be raising my fees if this continues. Any full time translator should be happy to pay the license for Studio (or similar), because they will save thousands of euros (dollars or whatever currency you work with) per year working with Studio rather than XTM (or all other shitty freeware).
It is also a desaster for quality. Just a simple fact that there is no option to batch open files is a clear indication that the developers has no clue of translating nor the the competition.
Another thing is QA, it is so bad it is not even worth comenting. The only decent way is a way to complicated workflow of exporting files, run a XBench and go back file hopping for hours, or days if it is a big project.
Some examples of how shitty the tool is:
- TM searches are manual and complicated, and you even have to switch panel to jump between concordance and fuzzy.
- Virtually no customization, you cant even decide where to place the TM/Glossary. I think the only option is within the browser window or in a separate browser window.
- All settings are client imposed, and most clients have never seen a translator in work, and much less done a professional translation.
- There is no batch opening files nor project QA
- No productivity features like in Studio and other professionall software, with automated substitutions, text prediction etc.
- You need to work in the same order as the client assigned the files or you will get stupid "match from other file" message.
- QA errors are not definied, you just get a icon and have to spend time on hovering or clicking to see what the error is about
- Tm updates, search, fuzzy etc. seem to work in a mysterious way.
And so on for a long time.
My estimation and opinion is that a translation in XTM should be priced 20-25% higher than a translation in Studio, due to the incredibly slow and complicated workflow. It also requires at least one or two more QA steps to guarantee some minimum quality for the end users.
End clients using XTM clearly hasnt got a clue about translation/localization and uses it to save "a couple of pennies" and "keep control", but in the end ends up paying more, needing more time, getting a smaller translator pool etc. making the projects take longer, being of lower quality etc. and finally leading to loosing the client or having to change to a professionall software.
The only tool on the market that is worse is Across/CrossWeb, but that is virtially exclusive for John Deere.
To me there are just 2 CAT Tools on the market, SDL Trados Studio and MemoQ, the rest are just sad copies with the only "advantage" of being online.
The problem is that very few end clients still doesnt have a clue about what localization is, like "my nephew spent 3 months in Madrid, maybe he could do the Spanish localization if we are in a hurry", when the reality is that many translators are better prepared than most CEOs of smaller companies and very professionall, working very long hours with the pressure of always being expected to deliver perfect quality (I am quite confident that 90% of the translations have better quality than the source texts).
I am sorry for the long post, but I needed to vent somewhere, because the business suddenly seem to be going backwards. I would honestly prefer using Workbench or TagEditor before most of the software used today.
Topic: What is your opinion on XTM Cloud CAT tool?
Poster: jensskarpe
Post title: XTM gettign bigger due to mergers
Hi all, very interesting discussion.
I am not very active here, but wanted to try to add to the discussion. Due to the latest mergers in the translations bussiness it is my experience/feeling that XTM is getting much more common, and I hate it!
Personally I will definately be raising my fees if this continues. Any full time translator should be happy to pay the license for Studio (or similar), because they will save thousands of euros (dollars or whatever currency you work with) per year working with Studio rather than XTM (or all other shitty freeware).
It is also a desaster for quality. Just a simple fact that there is no option to batch open files is a clear indication that the developers has no clue of translating nor the the competition.
Another thing is QA, it is so bad it is not even worth comenting. The only decent way is a way to complicated workflow of exporting files, run a XBench and go back file hopping for hours, or days if it is a big project.
Some examples of how shitty the tool is:
- TM searches are manual and complicated, and you even have to switch panel to jump between concordance and fuzzy.
- Virtually no customization, you cant even decide where to place the TM/Glossary. I think the only option is within the browser window or in a separate browser window.
- All settings are client imposed, and most clients have never seen a translator in work, and much less done a professional translation.
- There is no batch opening files nor project QA
- No productivity features like in Studio and other professionall software, with automated substitutions, text prediction etc.
- You need to work in the same order as the client assigned the files or you will get stupid "match from other file" message.
- QA errors are not definied, you just get a icon and have to spend time on hovering or clicking to see what the error is about
- Tm updates, search, fuzzy etc. seem to work in a mysterious way.
And so on for a long time.
My estimation and opinion is that a translation in XTM should be priced 20-25% higher than a translation in Studio, due to the incredibly slow and complicated workflow. It also requires at least one or two more QA steps to guarantee some minimum quality for the end users.
End clients using XTM clearly hasnt got a clue about translation/localization and uses it to save "a couple of pennies" and "keep control", but in the end ends up paying more, needing more time, getting a smaller translator pool etc. making the projects take longer, being of lower quality etc. and finally leading to loosing the client or having to change to a professionall software.
The only tool on the market that is worse is Across/CrossWeb, but that is virtially exclusive for John Deere.
To me there are just 2 CAT Tools on the market, SDL Trados Studio and MemoQ, the rest are just sad copies with the only "advantage" of being online.
The problem is that very few end clients still doesnt have a clue about what localization is, like "my nephew spent 3 months in Madrid, maybe he could do the Spanish localization if we are in a hurry", when the reality is that many translators are better prepared than most CEOs of smaller companies and very professionall, working very long hours with the pressure of always being expected to deliver perfect quality (I am quite confident that 90% of the translations have better quality than the source texts).
I am sorry for the long post, but I needed to vent somewhere, because the business suddenly seem to be going backwards. I would honestly prefer using Workbench or TagEditor before most of the software used today.