<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="wordpress/2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Global Watchtower™</title>
	<link>http://www.globalwatchtower.com</link>
	<description>Globalization in Practice</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:48:27 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>How Satisfied Are You with Your Translation Software Vendor?</title>
		<link>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/07/01/gsv-cust-satisfaction/</link>
		<comments>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/07/01/gsv-cust-satisfaction/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:42:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Donald A. DePalma</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Translation Technologies]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Language Industry]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/07/01/gsv-cust-satisfaction/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Whenever we plan to buy something, we often look to Consumer Reports, J.D. Power, Underwriters Laboratories, Good Housekeeping, or their national equivalents to get a sense of quality, performance, and customer satisfaction from previous buyers. None of these companies have asked purchasers of translation, localization, and internationalization software how satisfied they were with what they [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whenever we plan to buy something, we often look to Consumer Reports, J.D. Power, Underwriters Laboratories, Good Housekeeping, or their national equivalents to get a sense of quality, performance, and customer satisfaction from previous buyers. None of these companies have asked purchasers of translation, localization, and internationalization software how satisfied they were with what they bought, so Common Sense Advisory is stepping into the breach to ask. Voice your opinion and <a href="http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=NQdaoQiDW3AmjQD9ExFYBQ_3d_3d" target="_blank">take our survey</a> on customer satisfaction with language software. <a href="http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/07/01/gsv-cust-satisfaction/#more-654" class="more-link">(more&#8230;)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/07/01/gsv-cust-satisfaction/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Content Management Consolidation Continues</title>
		<link>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/29/sdl-xy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/29/sdl-xy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:41:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Donald A. DePalma</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Translation &amp; Localization]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Language Industry]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/29/sdl-xy/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This morning, SDL announced that it would pay US$14.7 million to acquire XyEnterprise in its latest move to expand its global information management capabilities. The acquisition is the most recent example of consolidation in the fragmented content management system (CMS) sector. SDL acquires good technology at an attractive price (1.48 times revenue versus the 2.5 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This morning, SDL announced that it would pay US$14.7 million to acquire XyEnterprise in its latest move to expand its global information management capabilities. The acquisition is the most recent example of consolidation in the fragmented content management system (CMS) sector. SDL acquires good technology at an attractive price (1.48 times revenue versus the 2.5 or more multiplier of better economic times), while Xy distances itself from competitors in the SGML-morphed-to-XML CMS sector.</p>
<p> <a href="http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/29/sdl-xy/#more-653" class="more-link">(more&#8230;)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/29/sdl-xy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chernobyl Children Project Needs English-to-Russian Translators</title>
		<link>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/23/ccpusa-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/23/ccpusa-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:32:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Donald A. DePalma</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Interpretation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Culture &amp; Globalism]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Language Industry]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/23/ccpusa-2009/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We&#8217;re happy to advise translators of an opportunity to help their fellow man. The Chernobyl Children Project is looking for a few good English-to-Russian translators and interpreters.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;re happy to advise translators of an opportunity to help their fellow man. The Chernobyl Children Project is looking for a few good English-to-Russian translators and interpreters.  <a href="http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/23/ccpusa-2009/#more-639" class="more-link">(more&#8230;)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/23/ccpusa-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Freelance Translators Clash with LinkedIn over Crowdsourced Translation</title>
		<link>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/19/linkedin-ct3/</link>
		<comments>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/19/linkedin-ct3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:49:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nataly Kelly</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Translation &amp; Localization]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Language Industry]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/19/linkedin-ct3/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This week, LinkedIn sent a survey to language professionals to capture their feedback on potential participation in what Common Sense Advisory calls &#8220;CT3&#8221; &#8212; community, crowdsourced, and collaborative translation. What was the reaction among freelancers to LinkedIn&#8217;s call for volunteers? Outrage, mixed with ample confusion.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This week, LinkedIn sent a survey to language professionals to capture their feedback on potential participation in what Common Sense Advisory calls &#8220;<a href="http://www.commonsenseadvisory.com/research/report_view.php?id=97&amp;cid=0" target="_blank">CT3</a>&#8221; &#8212; community, crowdsourced, and collaborative translation. What was the reaction among freelancers to LinkedIn&#8217;s call for volunteers? Outrage, mixed with ample confusion. <a href="http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/19/linkedin-ct3/#more-652" class="more-link">(more&#8230;)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/19/linkedin-ct3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Coping with Heterogeneous TMS Environments</title>
		<link>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/19/clay-tablet-multi-point-tms/</link>
		<comments>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/19/clay-tablet-multi-point-tms/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:31:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Benjamin B. Sargent</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Translation Technologies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/19/clay-tablet-multi-point-tms/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Translation management system (TMS) users tell us they derive significant efficiency, cost, and quality benefits from systematic management of their translation and terminology assets. But what if your company’s language assets are &#8220;managed&#8221; in multiple TMSes or content managers?  Without automated synchronization between systems, the value of memories and terminology gets watered down by manual [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Translation management system (TMS) users tell us they derive significant efficiency, cost, and quality benefits from systematic management of their translation and terminology assets. But what if your company’s language assets are &#8220;managed&#8221; in multiple TMSes or content managers?  Without automated synchronization between systems, the value of memories and terminology gets watered down by manual process &#8212; or by lost leverage. <a href="http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/19/clay-tablet-multi-point-tms/#more-647" class="more-link">(more&#8230;)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/19/clay-tablet-multi-point-tms/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Translation Technology Shown in Berlin &#8212; and Mountain View</title>
		<link>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/12/new-transtech-jun09/</link>
		<comments>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/12/new-transtech-jun09/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 15:42:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Donald A. DePalma</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Translation Technologies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/12/new-transtech-jun09/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[To the surprise of many who predicted a small turnout due to slashed travel budgets, this week&#8217;s Localization World in Berlin actually drew 463 delegates. The conference sessions focused on &#8220;Know-how for Global Success.&#8221; According to a presentation by Common Sense Advisory, one driver of success would be the addition of a language component to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To the surprise of many who predicted a small turnout due to slashed travel budgets, this week&#8217;s Localization World in Berlin actually drew 463 delegates. The conference sessions focused on &#8220;Know-how for Global Success.&#8221; According to a presentation by Common Sense Advisory, one driver of success would be the addition of a language component to corporate intranets in support of knowledge management &#8212; we discussed these heady topics as &#8220;crowdsourcing inside the firewall.&#8221;</p>
<p>Out in the exhibition hall, language software vendors did not disappoint as they introduced or demonstrated new versions. However, the biggest news in translation technology originated in Mountain View, California as Google fired its latest salvo in language technology.  <a href="http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/12/new-transtech-jun09/#more-645" class="more-link">(more&#8230;)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/12/new-transtech-jun09/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SDL Clarifies Trados Licensing Policy</title>
		<link>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/10/trados-studio-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/10/trados-studio-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:15:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Donald A. DePalma</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Translation Technologies]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Language Industry]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/10/trados-studio-2009/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In our just-released report on how freelancers work and their attitudes toward computer-aided translation tools, we received a lot of feedback about how &#8220;this CAT software works&#8221; or &#8220;that one doesn&#8217;t.&#8221; One of the complaints was about licensing terms and conditions. The new version of Trados, released last week as SDL Trados Studio 2009, added [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In our just-released report on how freelancers work and their attitudes toward computer-aided translation tools, we received a lot of feedback about how &#8220;this CAT software works&#8221; or &#8220;that one doesn&#8217;t.&#8221; One of the complaints was about licensing terms and conditions. The new version of Trados, released last week as SDL Trados Studio 2009, added a new twist to the discussion. After receiving a lot of comments and reviewing translator message boards, we asked SDL about the changes &#8212; for more information, see  <a href="http://www.proz.com/forum/sdl_trados_support/137176-sdl_trados_studio_2009_licensing_and_process.html" target="_blank">the SDL Trados Studio license policy</a>.</p>
<p> <a href="http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/10/trados-studio-2009/#more-649" class="more-link">(more&#8230;)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/10/trados-studio-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Top 30 LSPs Errata</title>
		<link>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/05/top30-errata/</link>
		<comments>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/05/top30-errata/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 17:46:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Renato S. Beninatto</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Translation &amp; Localization]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Language Industry]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/05/top30-errata/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Every year, right after we publish our ranking of translation companies, we receive several messages with comments and questions ranging from people who think that our numbers are too small or too big, to names of companies that they believe should be included in our list but somehow escaped our notice. We usually address these [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Every year, right after we publish our ranking of translation companies, we receive several messages with comments and questions ranging from people who think that <a href="http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2006/09/04/just-how-big-language-industry/" target="_blank">our numbers are too small or too big</a>, to names of companies that they believe should be included in our list but somehow escaped our notice. We usually address these questions on an individual basis and apply that new knowledge to our next ranking.</p>
<p>However, this year we discovered two items that require correction or clarification:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Skrivanek</strong>. The Czech company, with revenues of US$37.3 million in 2008, ranks as the 22nd biggest LSP. The company has 450 employees in 53 offices around the world.</li>
<li><strong>Jonckers and LCJ</strong>. In the report, we imply that the merger of Locatech, Crossgap, and Jonckers replaced LCJ. Conversely, LCJ EEIG is very much alive, even though three of its shareholders merged into Jonckers in December 2008. Logoscript is still a private, independent company and shareholder of LCJ.</li>
</ul>
<p>Should your company have been on our list? Do you know of any that we missed? <a href="mailto:renato@commonsenseadvisory.com" target="_blank">Let us know</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.globalwatchtower.com/2009/06/05/top30-errata/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
