Start a new topic

Trados on an expensive MacBook Pro

Why on earth are people considering buying an expensive MacBook Pro to install Parallels and run Trados?

Why not go for the best solution: no Parallels, no Windows, no Trados. Using CafeTran instead.

The points are:

  • some clients ask "do you have Trados?" (and not "do you use Trados for this specific job?"). Instead of explaining and doing idiotically trials (as PMs cannot believe this works) this is a kind of shortcut
  • some clients want explicitly a sdlxliff file (all others geht the xlf file instead, and they are happy)
  • it is a kind of assurance, just in case CT (or my 2nd tool) doesn't do the trick (this case happens once every 3 years, and it is resolved without any noise)
  • I can do this marketing stuff of saying "we have the so-called market leader on board"

So memoQ is your primary CAT tool?

I knew this question would be coming... shame on me.

Honestly, no. CT offers a much better productivity. The stats windows always reminds me when I procastrinate too much, but really, I have an amount of words/hour of 1,5 times compared to memoQ. Why? Better structured windows, Mac shortcuts at hand, speed (and ultimately, I was somehow deceived by the matching algorithm in memoQ).

But it plays a certain role within my workflow (especially for Trados packages; I prefer to handle them via memoQ and work on the mqxliff).

>But it plays a certain role within my workflow (especially for Trados packages; I prefer to handle them via memoQ and work on the mqxliff).

Why would that be?

And you are, of course, aware of the fact that you can translate MQXLIFF files seamlessly in CafeTran. I do it all the time (when I'm not translating SDLXLIFF files ;)).

You misunderstood me. I always open Studio packages in memoQ and work on the resulting mqxliff files in CT, because CT (some moths ago) tended to put empty Studio segments as checked. I also enjoy the fact that comments in both programs are working perfectly synchronized.

Perhaps I should give Studio packages in CT a second chance...


For me, a personal installation of Studio is still necessary, mainly because I often receive projects with Multiterm glossaries.

One of the client's end-customers is a big company, and their projects almost always come with a long list of section/department names. I can convert it somehow into an Excel spreadsheet for use in CT. But, doing conversion every time I receive that same file, which may have been changed, would require a great amount of time and labor. And more importantly, asking the client if there has been any change in the list every time I receive it, is not an option for me.

So, my workflow is to translate the file with my converted glossary (which may not be up-to-date) on a "provisional basis" so long as those organizational names are concerned, and do one final QA on the Studio side (which carries the latest list).

P.S.., Anyway, I guess there is big demand among CT users for the ability to import Multiterm files in CT-ready format.


1 person likes this
Or does anyone know if there is a tool for converting a Multiterm file into a TBX terminology, which can be directly imported into CT as TM?


Can't you use toon nellen's Java tool?
>Perhaps I should give Studio packages in CT a second chance... // please do and please report the features that you are missing. It's in the interest of all sdlxliff translators among us to have the support of these files as good as possible. Even if this means support for certain segment statuses, termbases, comments. Heck, in even want to do the reviewing of sdlxliff in CafeTran--so I've requested support for track changes. BTW: can you merge segments in sdlxliff projects that you prepare in mQ first, prior to translating them in CafeTran?
A feature to automatically convert MultiTerm into TM via TBX would help us all.


Login to post a comment