Compare
Trados handles the memory. The document still has to survive the round trip.
A CAT tool is where a linguist works, and a translation memory is the asset an agency accumulates. Neither of those is the problem. The problem is what happens to the file around them.
What it is good at
The memory is the asset. Segment matching, reuse and terminology consistency across projects are solved problems in this category, and they are solved well.
The linguist workflow is mature. Translators know the tool, agencies have processes built around it, and replacing it would cost more than it returns.
It is not built for document reconstruction. That is not a criticism — a CAT tool is designed around segments, and segments are the right unit for memory rather than for layout.
Where the document itself is left to you
These are the gaps our pipeline exists to fill. They are about the file, not about the tool.
The file has to be taken apart first
Getting a .pptx or an .xlsx into a segment-based workflow means converting it, and the conversion is where layout information is lost.
Scanned pages have no segments
A page without a text layer has nothing to segment until optical recognition has run. In a mixed PDF that is a per-page decision.
Putting it back together is your work
After the segments come back translated, rebuilding the document around them is format-specific engineering — and it is the step that eats the margin.
Layout failures surface at delivery
A translated headline that no longer fits its box is not visible in a segment view. It becomes visible when the client opens the file.
Capability comparison
Categories, not vendors. We do not publish anyone's pricing, including our own.
| Row label | Us | Raw MT / cloud translation APIs | TMS platforms |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multilingual | Configured to your markets | A fixed list | A fixed list |
| Format preservation | Layout written back in place | Text or a rough file | Not an engine |
| Per-page processing plan | Each page routed on its own | One call, no quality control | Manual workflow |
| Multimodal input | Five source classes, five paths | Mostly text only | No |
| What you receive | Finished files | A block of translated text | Process management |
| Who owns the quality | Us | You | You |
How this sits next to Trados
Alongside it, not instead of it. The two solve different halves of the same job.
The usual shape: the document pipeline runs through us and returns a finished file; your linguists review it in the environment they already use, and the memory keeps accumulating in your system of record.
Your terminology still lives where it lives. We take a glossary — TXT, CSV or XLSX, up to 2000 terms — and enforce it during translation, so the terms are already applied by the time a reviewer sees the document.
We are not asking anyone to migrate. The value of a translation memory is that it compounds over years, and a migration destroys that. Keeping it is in everyone's interest.
Questions
Is this a replacement for Trados?
No. A CAT tool is where a linguist works; this is the pipeline that produces a finished document for them to review. Most engagements run both.
Can you read or write our translation memory?
Not as a standard capability. Memory belongs to your system of record. If you need an exchange between our output and your memory, that is scoping work — tell us the interface.
How do our terms get enforced?
Upload a glossary — TXT, CSV or XLSX, up to 2000 terms — and it is applied during translation rather than as a correction afterwards.
What about a document that is partly scanned?
Each page is classified individually, so the digital pages and the scanned pages take different paths inside the same file.
Do we have to change our process?
The review process stays as it is. What changes is that the document arrives already translated and assembled, instead of arriving as segments.
Send us the file that normally needs rebuilding by hand.
That is the whole evaluation — one document, run end to end, returned finished.
- No signup, no self-service portal — you send a file, we run it.
- You get the finished document back, not a screenshot of one.
- If it is not good enough, you have lost nothing.