Commercial research: your recent decision about paid CAT software Thread poster: kosuke kajimoto
|
|---|
Hello everyone,
ProZ support has permitted this inquiry in the technical forums. I represent a small for-profit software business in Japan. This is pre-development commercial research; we have no product or offer to sell. AI helped draft this post, and I am responsible for its content.
If you are an independent translator who chooses and pays for your own CAT software, please consider a brief, voluntary public reply about one actual decision in the past three months:... See more Hello everyone,
ProZ support has permitted this inquiry in the technical forums. I represent a small for-profit software business in Japan. This is pre-development commercial research; we have no product or offer to sell. AI helped draft this post, and I am responsible for its content.
If you are an independent translator who chooses and pays for your own CAT software, please consider a brief, voluntary public reply about one actual decision in the past three months:
1. What did you decide about buying, upgrading or switching paid CAT software, or keeping your setup/buying nothing after comparing paid options?
2. After that decision, what work, if any, still recurs and needs attention? If your existing tools or alternatives handle it well, please say so.
3. Did any remaining work affect your decision to buy, upgrade, keep paying for, or pass on paid software? “No” or “unclear” is equally useful.
Optionally, mention alternatives you actually tried, how often the work occurs, or roughly how long it takes. Please do not post specific amounts, budget limits, personal/contact details, client names, confidential material, files, screenshots or identifying project details. Satisfaction and unresolved problems are considered on the same terms.
This review ends on 23 October 2026 at 23:59 JST. We will analyse at most three eligible, consenting contributions in posting order. The public thread may still receive further replies; we will not add later contributions to this analysis.
On our side, only I will read participants' original replies. Only safely generalised, non-identifying summaries will go to our AI-assisted analyst. Replies retaining rare attributes or identifying combinations will be excluded. To volunteer for this use, please begin your reply with “I agree to the research use described here.” There are no incentives, DMs, external forms or sales follow-up.
Replies are public and may remain in search engines or copies. We cannot delete your forum post or third-party copies. By the end time above, you may ask in this thread to exclude your contribution from our analysis; this does not delete the public post. Thank you. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
kosuke kajimoto wrote:
If you are an independent translator who chooses and pays for your own CAT software,
I do not believe developing a new commercial CAT tool is a wise business decision in the current market. There are many free alternatives readily available. As a result, I would not be surprised if CAT software developers are facing significant challenges.
| | | | | Thanks for your perspective on CAT software | 07:35 |
Thank you for sharing your perspective. I appreciate you raising the point about free CAT tools and the challenges of introducing new commercial alternatives.
Just to clarify, this research isn't about proposing another general-purpose CAT tool. I'm interested in understanding real software decisions and whether existing solutions leave any recurring work unresolved. Experiences where current tools work well are equally valuable.
Thanks again for taking the time to comm... See more Thank you for sharing your perspective. I appreciate you raising the point about free CAT tools and the challenges of introducing new commercial alternatives.
Just to clarify, this research isn't about proposing another general-purpose CAT tool. I'm interested in understanding real software decisions and whether existing solutions leave any recurring work unresolved. Experiences where current tools work well are equally valuable.
Thanks again for taking the time to comment! ▲ Collapse
| | | | | In the interests of transparency ... | 10:18 |
kosuke kajimoto wrote:
ProZ support has permitted this inquiry in the technical forums.
(...)
Given the increasing numbers of Proz forum topics started by 'New users' whose profiles are utterly empty, and which make potentially invasive enquires about the business practices of long-standing Proz members, I wonder if a member of the Proz staff would care to come here and confirm the above-quoted statement from the OP?
| | |
|
|
|
| Clarification on permission to post this inquiry | 11:16 |
Jennifer Levey wrote:
kosuke kajimoto wrote:
ProZ support has permitted this inquiry in the technical forums.
(...)
Given the increasing numbers of Proz forum topics started by 'New users' whose profiles are utterly empty, and which make potentially invasive enquires about the business practices of long-standing Proz members, I wonder if a member of the Proz staff would care to come here and confirm the above-quoted statement from the OP?
Thank you for raising this concern. I understand why a new account asking about professional software decisions could raise questions.
For clarity, I represent a small software business in Japan conducting pre-development research. I am not presenting myself as a translator or a CAT software vendor. Participation is entirely voluntary, and I am not asking for private business records, client information or contact details.
Before posting, I contacted ProZ support and received permission to post this inquiry in the technical forums.
I agree that confirmation directly from ProZ staff would be reassuring, and I would welcome that. I also understand that permission to post is not an endorsement of any future product or commercial activity.
Thank you for highlighting the importance of transparency.
| | | |
kosuke kajimoto wrote:
Thank you for raising this concern. I understand why a new account asking about professional software decisions could raise questions.
For clarity, (...)
Your response tells us nothing new about you, about the company you say you represent, or about the permission you say you got from Proz staff. The minimalist information added a few minutes to your profile also tells us nothing new.
"Due diligence" is just as relevant to our business, procurement and technical strategies as it is to our requirement to verify the credentials of our clients (KYC).
Until you have taken steps to drop the cloak of anonymity surrounding this topic, and/or until such time as a senior representative of Proz.com has confirmed that you were given "permission to post this inquiry in the technical forums" (and, hopefully, confirm also that Proz carried out appropriate due diligence before giving such permission), I would strongly recommend that colleagues refrain from responding to your questions.
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Commercial research: your recent decision about paid CAT software | Pastey | Your smart companion app
Pastey is an innovative desktop application that bridges the gap between human expertise and artificial intelligence. With intuitive keyboard shortcuts, Pastey transforms your source text into AI-powered draft translations.
Find out more » |
| | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news related to CAT tools
