Yahoo has been dead for years. It just refuses to admit it. Let's move the mailing list to Discourse Thread poster: Michael Beijer
|
|---|
Michael Beijer 
United Kingdom
Local time: 07:09
Member (2009)
Dutch to English
+ ...
Look how much more fun and beautiful our lives could be if we chose a modern, civilised solution: http://forum.xbench.net/ (their new forum is running on Discourse: https://www.discourse.org/).
I appreciate all the work the mods of the memoQ Yahoo list do, but I just don’t think the underlying system is any go... See more Look how much more fun and beautiful our lives could be if we chose a modern, civilised solution: http://forum.xbench.net/ (their new forum is running on Discourse: https://www.discourse.org/).
I appreciate all the work the mods of the memoQ Yahoo list do, but I just don’t think the underlying system is any good. Yahoo has been dead for years. It just refuses to admit it.
Michael ▲ Collapse
| | | | Emma Goldsmith
Spain
Local time: 08:09
Member (2004)
Spanish to English
| Xbench forum | Aug 29, 2016 |
Michael Joseph Wdowiak Beijer wrote: Look how much more fun and beautiful our lives could be if we chose a modern, civilised solution: http://forum.xbench.net/ (their new forum is running on Discourse: https://www.discourse.org/). I appreciate all the work the mods of the memoQ Yahoo list do, but I just don’t think the underlying system is any good. Yahoo has been dead for years. It just refuses to admit it. Michael
Thanks for the heads-up, Michael. Just joined!
And I agree, the Discourse interface looks great - miles better than Yahoo.
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 08:09
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| Beautiful versus practical | Aug 29, 2016 |
Michael Joseph Wdowiak Beijer wrote:
I appreciate all the work the mods of the memoQ Yahoo list do, but I just don’t think the underlying system is any good. Yahoo has been dead for years. It just refuses to admit it.
And my response to this erroneous attitude is here.
What are your main objections to the Yahoo groups system (apart from the fact that you find it "ugly" and "old-fashioned")?
| | | | Michael Beijer
United Kingdom
Local time: 07:09
Member (2009)
Dutch to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | My prediction is as follows (and sorry if I offend anyone): … | Aug 29, 2016 |
Samuel Murray wrote: Michael Joseph Wdowiak Beijer wrote:
I appreciate all the work the mods of the memoQ Yahoo list do, but I just don’t think the underlying system is any good. Yahoo has been dead for years. It just refuses to admit it. And my response to this erroneous attitude is here. What are your main objections to the Yahoo groups system (apart from the fact that you find it "ugly" and "old-fashioned")?
Just look at this: http://forum.xbench.net/
That pretty much answers all of your questions. I would much rather interact with other "list members" @ sth like http://forum.xbench.net/ , than mess around with Yahoo's online interface (which is absolute garbage, and very, very slow). I also don't want to have to learn how to use and set up a clunky old desktop email client, to send/receive email messages, access/find old posts, etc.
My prediction is as follows (and sorry if I offend anyone): in 10-20 years, when all the old fogies are gone, mailing lists like Yahoo Groups will be a thing of the past, and rightly so. There is no way young people in their right minds would willingly opt for Yahoo Groups if they were given a choice. But they aren't. The lists are in the hands of an older generation, who still swear by The Bat, Thunderbird and Outlook, and who are probably all still on Windows XP.
I agree that the SDL Community system is sub-optimal, but there are much better ones available these days. Such as Discourse. However, at least SDL tried. Igor also tried, with his CafeTran forum. Also not perfect, but it is a step in the right direction. DVX will obviously never leave its Yahoo Stronghold, and not sure about the others.
I don't think Yahoo Groups is practical, at all. In fact, I think Discourse is much more practical, and beautiful. To use a Dutch word, which I'm sure you will know: Yahoo Groups et al. just don't offer the user any overzicht.
Michael
[Edited at 2016-08-29 22:44 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 08:09
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
Michael Joseph Wdowiak Beijer wrote: Samuel Murray wrote:
What are your main objections to the Yahoo Groups system (apart from the fact that you find it "ugly" and "old-fashioned")? Just look at this: http://forum.xbench.net/
Yes, I've looked at that URL before I posted my first reply, but that URL does not contain any indication of your main objections to the Yahoo groups system. It simply shows a colourful browser-based question-answer style forum with a presumably mobile friendly design. So, it "looks" nicer than e-mail.
I would much rather... than mess around with Yahoo's online interface...
Hold on... yes, the Yahoo Groups online interface is garbage, but most users of Yahoo Groups don't use it except in emergencies. Yahoo Groups are e-mail groups. What you see in the online interface is just something they tacked on afterwards and forgot about. In fact, it used to be more functional, but each new generation of developers can't keep their paws of anything that looks dated.
I also don't want to have to learn how to use and set up a clunky old desktop email client, to send/receive email messages, access/find old posts, etc.
No need for a desktop e-mail client. You can use a browser-based e-mail client if you want. You can use Gmail, if you want. And interacting with the Yahoo Groups server is pretty straight-forward as soon as you grasp the simple concept of sending e-mails to the server to change your settings.
There is no way young people in their right minds would willingly opt for Yahoo Groups if they were given a choice. But they aren't. The lists are in the hands of...
Well, the lists were originally created by users. They were easy to create and to maintain. What prevents current users from establishing a forum similar to the one that you are touting? Web-based forums are notoriously difficult to set up and maintain.
==
An advantage of browser-based forums is that it's easier to create separate subforums for separate products. In a mailing list system, you have to either hope that users will include their product version in the subject line of each message, or create separate mailing lists for the different products.
The four Wordfast products have four distinct mailing lists, for example. This works great. If I have a question about WFC, I don't post to the WFP group but to the WFC group.
Trados went the other way: users of Trados 2009 and later hijacked the Trados TagEditor and WorkBench group (or rather: they didn't bother to create a separate group). So today the "TW" mailing list is awash with posts for products that most members don't even use, simply because they're all "Trados" products. Users of TagEditor are wasting their time trying to get help from the "TagEditor" mailing list because most users on that mailing list don't use TagEditor and probably haven't ever.
Whether mailing lists are dead or dying...
Ultimately, I think it's better to realise that different users prefer different ways of interacting with other users, and to allow multiple access points. Each platform has its own strengths and weaknesses.
[Edited at 2016-08-30 09:10 GMT]
| | | | Michael Beijer
United Kingdom
Local time: 07:09
Member (2009)
Dutch to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | I don't think you get it | Aug 30, 2016 |
Samuel Murray wrote: Michael Joseph Wdowiak Beijer wrote: Samuel Murray wrote:
What are your main objections to the Yahoo Groups system (apart from the fact that you find it "ugly" and "old-fashioned")? Just look at this: http://forum.xbench.net/ Yes, I've looked at that URL before I posted my first reply, but that URL does not contain any indication of your main objections to the Yahoo groups system. It simply shows a colourful browser-based question-answer style forum with a presumably mobile friendly design. So, it "looks" nicer than e-mail. I would much rather... than mess around with Yahoo's online interface... Hold on... yes, the Yahoo Groups online interface is garbage, but most users of Yahoo Groups don't use it except in emergencies. Yahoo Groups are e-mail groups. What you see in the online interface is just something they tacked on afterwards and forgot about. In fact, it used to be more functional, but each new generation of developers can't keep their paws of anything that looks dated. I also don't want to have to learn how to use and set up a clunky old desktop email client, to send/receive email messages, access/find old posts, etc. No need for a desktop e-mail client. You can use a browser-based e-mail client if you want. You can use Gmail, if you want. And interacting with the Yahoo Groups server is pretty straight-forward as soon as you grasp the simple concept of sending e-mails to the server to change your settings.
I don't want to use email (i.e., individual emails, accessed in an email solution, either online, such as Gmail, or a desktop client) to interact with people in the memoQ mailing list. I want to use an online forum. Online forums are much better, and much more useful.
Luckily, Proz seems to improving theirs, and so we can of course also use this very forum, instead of the memoQ Yahoo Group. It's just a bit of a shame, and a missed opportunity for Kilgray, but then again, that's their problem, if they want to leave one of their most important customer venues in the hands of dinosaurs and obsolete technology, that's their prerogative.
Michael
[Edited at 2016-08-30 08:41 GMT]
| | | | CafeTran Training (X)
Netherlands
Local time: 08:09
| Are vendors moving away from Proz for support? | Aug 30, 2016 |
Michael Joseph Wdowiak Beijer wrote:
Luckily, Proz seems to improving theirs, and so we can of course also use this very forum, instead of the memoQ Yahoo Group.
It's my impression that vendors are moving away from Proz for support. They create their own portals, instead of allowing us to have everything present at Proz.com.
Even if I'm a user of CAT tool X, I'd like to stay informed about features and bugs of CAT tools Y and Z.
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 08:09
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
Michael Joseph Wdowiak Beijer wrote:
I don't want to use email (i.e., individual emails, accessed in an email solution, either online, such as Gmail, or a desktop client) to interact with people in the memoQ mailing list. I want to use an online forum.
Oh, why didn't you just say so, then?
I can understand your frustration with MemoQ, however. The MemoQ web site does not make it easy for users to see where they can get help from other users. The Yahoogroups mailing list is mentioned only briefly in one of the deep subpages. Neither the TC nor the ProZ.com subforums for MemoQ are mentioned. MemoQ has no self-hosted forum at all. But will it be popular?
The Yahoogroup gets 200-300 messages per month off its 1400 members, and has had a steady stream of participation for a number of years. The TC MemoQ subforum is asleep. The ProZ.com MemoQ subforum gets fewer than 50 posts per month. There are also a few Facebook groups for MemoQ (the official one has 900 members, the MemoQ 2013 group has 350 members, etc).
I think you're in for an unpleasant surprise if you think that most MemoQ users will flock to a MemoQ hosted forum, no matter how fancy it looks.
| | |
|
|
|
Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 08:09
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
CafeTran Training wrote:
It's my impression that vendors are moving away from Proz for support.
Some of them do, but I haven't seen a trend. In a few cases I have been told by a tool representative on ABC that I should submit future questions to XYZ instead of ABC, so yes, for some tools there is definitely a move to consolidate queries in one handy place. The question is: handy for whom? Not the users...
Even if I'm a user of CAT tool X, I'd like to stay informed about features and bugs of CAT tools Y and Z.
This is a valid point, and a similar one applies to mailing lists when using an e-mail program. The e-mail program allows you to read messages from different tools in a single well-known interface. The ProZ.com forums allow us to read messages from different tools in a single well-known interface. If I had to use the self-hosted forums from the individual vendors, I would not only have to visit different sites to see different products, but I would also have to adjust the way I interact with each forum system because each one will be different.
| | | | CafeTran Training (X)
Netherlands
Local time: 08:09
| Who controls them and archiving | Aug 30, 2016 |
Other points that are relevant:
- Who controls them? Can you really criticize the tool (in a fair way of course)?
- How about archiving valuable info? Forum owner can remove postings/threads that are still relevant to you. Another argument for Proz! All postings are archived. Quite often, very old threads are revived.
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Yahoo has been dead for years. It just refuses to admit it. Let's move the mailing list to Discourse | 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! » |
| | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
