Hi Paul,

I used the Studio 2014 option: translate a single file.

I receive the error message right from the beginning, so there was no way even to start.

Maybe you can try to open it in Studio 2014?

I'm trying to upload the file by dragging and dropping (does not work) and by inserting which gives only the image of a folder.

Can I send it by e-mail to you?

Paul said:

you have sent me a DOCX file that was created in a version of Word not available when Studio 2014 was developed.

Any more details about WHAT EXACTLY is causing the problem? Or just this generic claim?

Evzen Polenka said:

Any more details about WHAT EXACTLY is causing the problem? Or just this generic claim?

None.  All I can tell you is that maintaining the old filters was getting increasingly difficult so in order to cope better with new versions of DOCX in the future and handle new features and things users had been asking for in the old ones, so we completely rebuilt them.

The new filters will not be retrofitted into old non-supported versions of Studio.

Hi Rita Depuydt ,

It does indeed seem strange, but perhaps not as cut and dry as the picture you paint. The last thing we really want to do is have to go through these kind of problems every time Microsoft bring out a new version of their filters so profit through denial is not the way we work!

First of all, I believe that the filters in Studio are more capable than any other in terms of what they are able to do with the information provided by Microsoft. For many customers it is not enough to simply extract the basic text you see in the file, it's also important to be able to do things like this (and this is not intended to be an exhaustive list):
- handle tracked changes (source/target)
- options around special chars, complex scripts, different fonts, advanced formatting, hyperlinks, mathematical expressions etc.
- handling comments
- processing content controls
- dealing with document properties
- font mapping
- etc.

The complexity of the filters doesn't end there either as we expose features from Word that can be used in the Studio Editor in various ways including document structure and preview. It also means that we need to be very specific about the versions of the files we are opening as we are using things that are simply not relevant to other tools and as a result this can mean that when Microsoft upgrade their own formats that we need to address this with an update to the filters.

All of these things and more have resulted in the Word filetype in Studio being quite a complex thing that can be very difficult to change when we need to support more features for our users. So much so that when we also moved Studio to a new version of the .NET framework in Studio 2015 we also decided to completely rewrite the filetypes so that they could provide us with many of the things that were missing in Studio 2014 and earlier. Since they were built against a different .NET framework retrofitting it to Studio 2014 would have meant rebuilding 2014 against a new version of this framework and this essentially would have meant a new major version of the product to upgrade to anyway. So we did not do this, instead we added them into 2015 as this came with a lot of improvements over 2014 alongside the older ones as we made sure that they were going to be suitable for all our users.

These new filetypes readily support a wider range of Word formats than before, support realtime previews irrespective of the version of Word you are using and introduced support for many of the things our users had been asking for that are not possible in other tools at all.

We did try to drop the old filters in 2017 and only work with the new ones, but these caused problems for some of our customers who were still working with users on older versions of Studio. So we took a decision to add the old ones back in again until more of our userbase had upgraded to the more current versions of the software.

I have received your email and many of the people you have quoted in there actually have different problems to the ones you have raised. They needed the older filetypes to be available to them and we have done this. Putting the new filetypes into Studio 2014 is not an option for us at all. You are using an old piece of software that has been through two major upgrades and I'm afraid the only way you are going to be able to work with files created in a more modern version of Office is to either upgrade or continue to work with other tools that will deliver what you need now.

I have tried to explain the rationale behind our decisions and can't really tell you any more than this. I think a support & maintenance contract makes sense for anyone engaged as a professional translator because you are always able to ensure that you have the latest version of the software available to you, and this will be supported for the new computer you purchase and the new versions of office you use as well as you being able to get technical help whenever you need it.

Hi Rita Depuydt ,

I'm sorry Rita, but I have tried to explain why the new forms of DOCX cannot be opened by our older versions of the software and why we have created new filters to support the needs of our entire userbase.

Based on your conclusion of a win-win we would have to forget about upgrades and developing software as we'd have to give it away for for free to every customer we have. We'd have no business to run as we could not afford to pay anyone to deliver it. It might be a negligle cost for just you, but really... why should you be entitled to something for nothing that other customers pay for to help support the development of the software for the future?

I think to use your analogy, if you send me the new topping you have received for use with your old pizza then I can provide you with some topping that's also 4-years old and then you'd be able to eat it.

Alternatively, why don't you upgrade? The version of software you are using is not supported at all anymore. With a support contract we provide mechanisms for professional translators using our software to work with us and be part of our business, and in return we provide free support, free upgrades to the software and ensure that they are able to work without problems to the best of our ability.

We do take great pride in our jobs and in trying to help our customers to ensure they are being fairly treated and get what they need from the software we provide. But it's not a one way street. We do this in return for you continuing to work with us and using the solutions we provide to help deal with the continual changes created in the software and hardware world. If you choose not to take them then there is only so much we can do.

Paul said:

Evzen Polenka

Any more details about WHAT EXACTLY is causing the problem? Or just this generic claim?

 

None.  All I can tell you is that maintaining the old filters was getting increasingly difficult so in order to cope better with new versions of DOCX in the future and handle new features and things users had been asking for in the old ones, so we completely rebuilt them.

The point of my question was that there is a series of screwed patches going on since the beginning of this year for both Windows AND Office... so it wouldn't be suprising if these incompatibilities are caused by some screwed Office update(s).
So it would be fair to thoroughly investigate the real cause and inform transparently the users instead of just using this opportunity to force users to upgrade, just to make the developers' lifes easier (and to make some 'easy money' too).

I know very well that it gets hard to maintain code 'forever'... but come one, the users are not here to make developers' life easy, it's the opposite!

And if SDL would have introduced subscription-based licensing years ago (which includes upgrades to new versions), these problems would be solved.
Anti-malware producers did it decade(s) ago, other big companies like Adobe as well...

Paul said:

Evzen Polenka

Any more details about WHAT EXACTLY is causing the problem? Or just this generic claim?

 

None.  All I can tell you is that maintaining the old filters was getting increasingly difficult so in order to cope better with new versions of DOCX in the future and handle new features and things users had been asking for in the old ones, so we completely rebuilt them.

The point of my question was that there is a series of screwed patches going on since the beginning of this year for both Windows AND Office... so it wouldn't be suprising if these incompatibilities are caused by some screwed Office update(s).
So it would be fair to thoroughly investigate the real cause and inform transparently the users instead of just using this opportunity to force users to upgrade, just to make the developers' lifes easier (and to make some 'easy money' too).

I know very well that it gets hard to maintain code 'forever'... but come one, the users are not here to make developers' life easy, it's the opposite!

And if SDL would have introduced subscription-based licensing years ago (which includes upgrades to new versions), these problems would be solved.
Anti-malware producers did it decade(s) ago, other big companies like Adobe as well...

Evzen Polenka said:

And if SDL would have introduced subscription-based licensing years ago (which includes upgrades to new versions), these problems would be solved.

Perhaps... how much difference financially do you think this would be compared to a support & maintenance contract which in effect does the same thing.  This is an interesting read:

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/moving-to-subscription/subscription-vs-maintenance-a-mathematical-perspective/td-p/7303077

How do you see this solving the problem and making it financially better Evzen?  I guess for us it would be much better!