A computer newsletter for translation professionals

We asked, you answered. Thanks so much for taking part in the survey that Interprenaut and I put together. We will use a lot of these answers in our upcoming book, but this Wordle graphic summarizes the kind of excitement and pride most translators and interpreters feel for their work. In one of the questions, we asked you to describe with one word how you felt about your profession. Here are the answers (completely uncensored and you can click to see a larger version):

Clearly, there are two things that can be concluded from this riotous stew of words -- first, we are very happy people after all, and second, some of us like really strange words (and Mary Poppins!) None of that is too surprising, but it makes me happy to be part of our community.

Some of the other answers will be shared in Interprenaut's newsletter next week and in the upcoming book, but I HAVE to share two more answers. One was about the most unusual job/assignment you've ever had. The answer that clearly couldn't be published in any other respectable media outlet was about translating a tattoo. It was . . . nah, I can't share it here either! Just let your imagination roam freely to picture something that an extremely inebriated 21-year-old male might say about his focus of the moment and how it relates to his self-worth (which surely plummeted radically upon waking up hurting and hung over the next morning).

The other response that made me strangely proud was an answer to the question about what you love most about your work as a translator or interpreter. Check this out: "I love using CAT technology and finding ways to automate what I do. I also love expressing complex, ambiguous sentences in clear, straightforward English."

Bless her heart.

And speaking of strange words, how about creaky-creaky, psychohail, whippoccino, shimmerglisten, and zhivagodamarbletash. Don't recognize them? They're just a few of Kate Bush and Stephen Fry's "50 Words for Snow" on Kate's latest CD -- and her clever way of debunking the myth of the 50 "Eskimo" words for snow. I've been playing it over and over again against the rainy backdrop of the Oregon coast. Very hypnotic. 

One of the most often used applications on my computer today is Paint Shop Pro 7, which was released in 2001. I know what some of you are thinking: He should be ashamed of himself! (Still others are wondering Paint WHAT?)

And you know what else? I'm proud of it. It has become my personal little reactionary statement against the update craze!

Don't misunderstand me. I'm not trying to promote this program. It was published by a now-defunct company (the current version of Paint Shop is marketed by Corel as an overblown photo editing software) and it did in 2001 exactly what it does today: works with the most common graphic file formats with very simple and easy-to-understand tools (for some miraculous reason it still runs on Windows 7). Now, I know that there are many graphics applications out there that are much more modern and powerful and versatile, including the free Paint.NET and GIMP, but I still prefer my sweet little Paint Shop, which can do (almost) everything I need it to do. And it's easy for me to operate it because I know my way around it.

For me, this has become a symbol of how I -- and maybe we -- should take a stand against upgrading our software. In some areas of technology, after standards are established they actually don't change anymore because there is no need for them to change. Such is the way with many graphic, sound, and video formats. For a very long time this was also the way with HTML (this is in the process of changing). And there are many others that could be listed. In fact, I suspect the number of these "finalized" formats actually will increase. Since many file formats can now be represented with XML, they might still change in their final format, but we will be able to process the XML representation.

So what are valid reasons to upgrade software?

The most important one for us is probably client demands. If a client will work with me only if I use a certain version of a certain program, and there is no way to use another program because I'm part of an established workflow and process, I can either choose to lose the client or purchase/upgrade the program.

The second reason is compatibility with other tools and formats. If a format is not standardized and set in stone like the ones we were talking about earlier, we again need to decide whether it's feasible to access these files through conversions and other workarounds, buy new versions of the software, or lose potential jobs.

Only for the third reason would I look at the one point that many of us tend to think of first: major features that we really need. As a businessperson, I would ask myself this question: What do I just think is "cool," and what do I think is going to be such a productivity boost that I'll recoup the purchase or upgrade price right away? Obviously, if my output skyrockets because I can now -- I don't know -- mind-control my computer, I'd be stupid not to take the plunge. But to purchase something only because the new software features "sound good"? That's not a good investment. Here's a good example: I often receive announcements from the makers of my favorite every-day-in-use text editors -- UltraEdit and Emeditor -- talking about their new versions. The versions that I currently run are at least five versions behind, so every time a new version is released I look through the new features to find out whether there is a major change. And, lo and behold, the new versions always have a bunch of major changes. The problem: I typically don't even understand what most of them are about. They're usually geared exclusively toward software developers, and they could have been written in Klingon for all they mean to me. There's no way that I'll be investing in that upgrade. The functions that I need as a translator are pretty basic text management and code page features that were as good five versions ago as they are today. 

Across Personal Edition for Freelancers FOR FREE!

Already more than 20,000 freelancers use our all-around worry-free package.

Register your Freelance license of Across Personal Edition now and save up 1,450 USD!

Get your Across Personal Edition here. 

SDL just released a new product this week that I think might have some potential. SDL Studio GroupShare is geared toward organizations and LSPs with internal translation groups that are committed to using SDL products. SDL WorldServer represents a very top-down approach that doesn't square with the way many organizations do business. However, GroupShare is essentially a continuation of the previous SDL Server products for termbases and translation memories, with the added benefit of having the translation projects also sit on a server. And since all collaborators can see all the files of a given project at all times, they can see which files are already being worked on or have been finalized, and reserve the files that they want to work on. As a result, the project manager potentially does not have to intervene as much in the process (at least so the thinking goes), and translators can work on the files that they prefer.

It's a good idea, and I would love to see what users say after using it for a while. The large projects that I've been part of have typically not been structured that way. In general there were very strict guidelines for when the end client wanted to see each file returned rather than a blanket deadline for the project as a whole, in which case it would indeed not matter what was translated first.

I like the fact that the projects are stored online -- it makes a lot of sense in this day and age. I find it hard to understand, however, why the project files have to be downloaded to work on. It's a good option for times when there is no Internet connectivity, for instance, but downloading makes it impossible to collaborate in real-time on one file. But the folks at SDL say they are working on a solution to enable that.

At this point it's really not a product for groups of freelancers, unless you are part of a very well-equipped bunch of translators. Presently there is no hosted solution, which means that you would have to run your own server environment for this. Again, SDL is working on a hosted version as well.

Translators and editors can use the new SDL Studio Workgroup edition instead of the more expensive Professional edition to work with organizations that use this product. The difference between the two is that while both are network-enabled, you can't create projects with Studio Workgroup or use it for any administrative or customizable tasks. Otherwise you will have to be equipped with a Professional edition of Studio 2011 to be able to use all the features of the GroupShare product.

Though the product has some features that could be streamlined (such as concurrent access to one file), I'm really looking forward to its next move into cloud-based access and (hopefully) affordability for independent groups of translators. 

I know that many of you use Skype as one your main tools for communicating with colleagues, friends, and family. Those of you who have texted with me on Skype know that I don't particularly like emoticons (except when they come from my 12-year-old, who carries on long discussions with me all via those silly icons). In fact, I have been known to be rather dismissive of icon overuse -- until, that is, I found the treasure trove of hidden Skype icons.

Unlike their mostly boring counterparts, these are not accessible via the Skype user interface. You actually have to type them in. Type in (headbang) and see how your conversation partner responds. (Swear) results in what you'd expect, as does (smoke) -- it cracks me up that they actually have an icon for that. Some say the (heidy) is a good illustration of my attention span, but beware -- I might just type (finger) or, if you're a really good friend, (mooning). My kids often enter (tmi) when they talk to me (they actually say it more often than they type it), but I can always counter with (lala).

Well, you get the idea. The whole rigmarole of hidden icons can be found right here. 

SDL Trados Studio 2011 Premier Packs

Buy or upgrade to SDL Trados Studio 2011, the latest version of SDL's translation memory software, and save 15% + get free training. For more information or to buy visit our shop: http://www.sdl.com/promo/toolkit_01.

 Hurry, offer ends 10th February. 

Awhile back I wrote a lot about AIT, the Ukrainian company that has churned out product after product after product for our industry. I was in awe at the creativity and determination with which these products were launched. There's been a bit of a lull around AIT recently, though, and while all or most of its products are still maintained, three AIT products have sort of risen above the fray: the word count program AnyCount; Projetex, a project management application for small and medium-sized companies; and Translation Office 3000 (TO3000), an accounting and invoicing system for freelance translators.

Now it seems that AIT has awoken from its long hibernation (already spring in Kiev?) to release a new version of Projetex, followed by a new version of TO3000 next month.

The new features for Projetex (which I didn't have a chance to test) include full Unicode support (it somehow seems really 1990s to mention that) as well as a general overhaul of the underlying database, reporting, and export engine. Also, you can now run it on any virtualization solution, which means that it is relatively platform-independent (as long as you have a virtualized copy of Windows on your machine).

When I talked to Vladimir, I was sure he would also mention that they've implemented an online interface, a project that they've been talking about for a long time. Not so fast, he says, even though it's in the "production pipeline." But what he had to say about it was interesting. He feels that online translation management is mainly beneficial for selling purposes. Among their customers, "project managers work mostly with files and e-mails and they need robust file management in the first place."

I'd love to hear some feedback from you. I'm not sure that I completely agree with his assessment, and I think it's a little disappointing that they have not made this a priority. Even if project managers can log on through VPN or other kinds of access, interfaces to vendors and clients have become an expected reality in most other systems.

Still, I would not be surprised to see a reiteration with exactly those features very soon.

I use TO3000, and I'm excited about the new version with its promising first list of new features. I had hoped to have a chance to look at it for this newsletter, but the software was not quite ready. Stay tuned for the next issue. 

Of the 10,000 folks who receive this newsletter, I bet that only five or six will find this relevant. And even if it's only one -- actually, even if there is not even one -- I would like to happily report that I was able to kill the ultra-annoying DropInSavings popup that was bothering me on some of my favorite websites for almost a week. I was using Firefox, but it can become a nuisance in virtually any browser. What is it? It's a little, evil adware program that shows up in the upper right-hand corner of many websites and tries to offer you coupons. When you happen to hover over it with your mouse, it makes its presence known by spilling its ill-advised content over the page like a dead nutria's guts on the side of the road. (You feel sorry for the nutria? Check out its teeth!) A quick web search to uninstall DropInSavings produces a plethora of different tips, one of which might or might not work for you. But since the problem is that it can come in all kinds of devious forms, you might never find a good way to uninstall it. Fortunately, once it's in gut-spilling mode, you can see a little wheel icon at the bottom right side of the popup. Click it to find an option to deactivate it. Sound easy? I know -- but it still took me forever to find and disable.

Fast-driving Dino Ferrari was frustrated that the text-to-speech feature I mentioned in my last newsletter is not available in Office 2007 (only in the 2010 version.) Right he is, and while there is a workaround, it's a rather tedious one -- my apologies. . . .

Some folks don't like to subscribe to Twitter and I can appreciate that. Still, it's a good resource if you know how to subscribe to the right channels. Understandably, Twitter no longer makes it particularly easy to follow a Twitter account with RSS so you can read it wherever you read your RSS feeds (this explanation of RSS is really old but still good).

Twitter will probably disable this "hack" in the near future, but for now you can still enter this into your browser's address field:

http://api.twitter.com/1/statuses/user_timeline.rss?screen_name=Jeromobot

You should now see a prompt to subscribe to the Twitter feed via RSS (of course, you can change the name of the Twitter feed to your preference -- but Jeromobot's hard to beat). 

I told you I would receive passionate responses to my article on localization tools from localization tool developers. I actually received only one but, yes, it was rather passionate. It came from Achim Herrmann of SDL Passolo.

Here in a nutshell is what I talked about last month: After speaking to Niko Papula of localization tool developer Multilizer, I felt reconfirmed that the future of the traditional localization tool is at best shaky, primarily for two reasons:

• most of the modern software development tools are text-based and can be opened and processed in virtually any tool; and
• translation environment tools have slowly expanded some capabilities to match those of localization tools, including features like pseudo-translation, visual localization, and support for more specialized formats.

Achim wrote his long response in German, so I'll try to summarize his response.

First, it's not just localization tool developers who have a grim future but also those companies that have built complex processes around those tools.

And, yes, he's right -- existing customers with heavy investments in these tools and the workflows they're integrated in would be silly not to use them anymore. After all, localization tools are great instruments with some features that other tools don't have. It's a valid question: Why would you try to change something that's not broken? My question would be whether it's sustainable for localization tool developers to live off existing customers.

As far as the more easily accessible formats -- like XML-based formats or text-based Java .properties files -- you can access them with any tool. But why use a prehistoric hand axe if you could use a hammer instead? The results with a more sophisticated tool are better. Unfortunately, this is not understood by translators, just as developers don't understand the translation process. Your article's viewpoint is one-dimensional because it reflects only the perspective of the translator rather than the developer. The developer needs the automation that only these tools can deliver.

In some areas I think Achim is right, but I think that he is ignoring a number of things that admittedly are easily overlooked if you focus on your company's products. First, he is short-selling some of the translation environment tools that are out there. I agree that some TEnTs offered only rudimentary translation of .exe files in the past, but some of the strategies in newer tool versions are a lot more sophisticated. It's true that it does not have all the sophistication of the good old localization tool, but not only formats have changed -- processes have, too. Very, very large localization processes today are performed on collaborative web-based platforms that tools like Passolo and Catalyst cannot emulate. And there is a whole host of self-developed and readily accessible tools for these processes.

Time will tell. It'll be interesting to see where the traditional localization tool providers are in five years. Several will still surely be around. But my feeling is that most of the others will have morphed into something else or simply disappeared. 

Fortis Revolution is the computer-assisted translation tool that will direct how you purchase and interact with translation software in the future.

Before Fortis Revolution, businesses had to piece together frustrating translation tools with confusing and hard-to-navigate product packages. Times have changed.

Fortis Revolution offers the simplicity of one product, one distribution and service channel, and one price, in an easy-to-use, yet effective tool to meet your individual translation needs.

One product, one place, one price -- the revolution has begun! 

Here is another addition to my family of remarkable characters that I have been collecting over the years. I found this while looking through an exhibition catalog (Inscribing Meaning, Smithsonian). Even though I didn't understand it, it stirred something elemental inside me.

If you have a Javascript-enabled browser, hold your cursor over the character for a definition.  

This book by Haruki Murakami, translated by Jay Rubin and Philip Gabriel, has been my companion for the last week or two. The following passage addresses rewriting an existing book rather than translation, but I'll bet some of you will be able to relate it to what we do:

After he finished rewriting Air Chrysalis, however, Tengo was truly chagrined for the first time in his life. While engaged in the rewrite, he had been totally absorbed in the process, moving his hands without thinking. Once he had completed the work and handed it to Komatsu, however, Tengo was assaulted by a profound sense of powerlessness. Once the powerlessness began to abate, a kind of rage surged up from deep inside him. The rage was directed at Tengo himself. I used another person's story to create a rewrite that amounts to a literary fraud, and I did it with far more passion than I bring to my own work. Isn't a writer someone who finds the story hidden inside and uses the proper words to express it? Aren't you ashamed of yourself? You should be able to write something as good as Air Chrysalis if you make up your mind to do it. Isn't that true? 

As a subscriber to the Premium version of this newsletter you have access to an archive of Premium newsletters going back to May 2008.

You can access the archive right here. This month the user name is toolbox and the password is 1q84.

New user names and passwords will be announced in future newsletters.

If you would like to promote this newsletter by placing a link on your website, I will in turn mention your website in a future edition of the Tool Box newsletter. Just paste the code you find here into the HTML code of your webpage, and the little icon that is displayed on that page with a link to my website will be displayed.

Here are some websites that added the Tool Box link last month:

www.wordstodeeds.com

© 2012 International Writers' Group