Jump to content
xLaming

Translate app improvements

Recommended Posts

Hello,

Actually, xat.com is using Google Translate on the "Translate App" (translate1.php) 

It isn't correct in a lot of sentences.

 

Let me show an example:

Bing:

7e45579332a143f99ba4f36c81c86a96.png

Google:

ea396e7476334199bbab6c5da846b0d9.png

 

You also can see that the translation isn't really 100% appropriate...

 

 

My suggestion is that, change Google to Bing. This is simple.

  • Award 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't think you will see a huge difference between them. No online translator will be perfect. A translator is capable of plugging words together but it is not capable enough to understand a sentence completely. You really can't base how good a translator is based on a few translations. 

 

As Daniel has already mentioned, Google Translate is much more respected and used. In fact, Google Translate allows you to mouse over the terms you wish to have an alternative translation of which is not a feature available in Bing. 

  • Award 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite what you two are saying, in my experience with translators,

Bing translate has provided a more accurate translation for the phrase.

 

I don't think Bing should be pushed out of the way just because Google is "more respected and used."

 

From what I've tested in the past, Bing is able to handle grammar and sentence structure a little better than Google.

 

Also, hovering over the words isn't going to help much on xat.

 

And in respects to him saying "appropriate," he possibly could have just meant that the phrase is more suitable or accurate to what he put in,

not necessarily inappropriate language, but that does appear to be what he is saying.

 

This has been brought up a while ago, not on the forum, but on xat5 (by me), and I'm with him on this.

  • Award 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, oj said:

Despite what you two are saying, in my experience with translators,

Bing translate has provided a more accurate translation for the phrase.

 

I don't think Bing should be pushed out of the way just because Google is "more respected and used."

 

From what I've tested in the past, Bing is able to handle grammar and sentence structure a little better than Google.

 

Also, hovering over the words isn't going to help much on xat.

 

And in respects to him saying "appropriate," he possibly could have just meant that the phrase is more suitable or accurate to what he put in,

not necessarily inappropriate language, but that does appear to be what he is saying.

 

This has been brought up a while ago, not on the forum, but on xat5 (by me), and I'm with him on this.

 

Yeah, it's more suitable for all

 

And languages like Turkish, Spanish and others the translation is bad on Google Translate, for that reason I said that Bing is better

 

Just because Google Translator is more used it is respected? This is nosense. It's better in the translation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a bit of testing with several languages should be done to challenge either translators, don't you think? Can't switch to Bing with haste, based on one example.

  • Award 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll do some testing. Finnish is notoriously hard to translate.

 

Google vs Bing

Google vs Bing (tie)

Google vs Bing

Google vs Bing (I wonder if at least this translation is correct. Google was a little closer..)

Google vs Bing (Luovuttaa could technically also be used as "to deliver", for example when delivering a package)

 

It seems like Bing has a better grasp of Finnish than Google.. Though I would have to test more to be sure.

 

Also.. In Swedish:

First two examples are exactly the same (and correct)

Google vs Bing

Google vs Bing (Bing is technically correct, but not quite. Then again both structure the sentence oddly)

Last example is correct for both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google's translator got a community section where anyone with a google account can join. And from there assist with the translations.

For proper comparison, I looked up at Microsoft and found out they got a feedback system for incorrect translations.

 

I have no info about the real numbers but its possible that Google has more helpers than Microsoft does, considering how big Google is.

So going by the helpers's concept (community based), one way to improve the quality of the translations is by having humans around to fix it.

And by that perspective and in my opinion, Google is winning.

 

I'd rather Google considering its community benefit. Thousands of users helping are likely to be more effective than a dozen of staffers

 

I think we should keep Google considering its quality unless tests from other languages show otherwise.

I haven't used Microsoft's translator but certainly it should be efficient only with Skype where they're investing their time and money in.

 

I'm not sure how Google reacts to other languages but its working for Portuguese at least, so I don't see need for change (unless it was broke)

 

1st example: Here Google keeps the adjective in place for "política saudável", printing "healthy policy"... but Microsoft separates it.

 

Google's:

f4889ef2dada4aab9b7821093cffbe11.png

 

Microsoft's:

28e8d910d705442e9a108371a7512871.png

 

2nd example: Here Google used a synonym for "dodge" by adding "sidestep" instead. Microsoft chose "divert" instead of dodge/sidestep.

DESVIAR = DODGE

 

Google's:

1394a41317de421f87c7e59dcd31623a.png

 

Microsoft's:

68897dcdcce542b68a0480a2b44ab8a5.png

  • Award 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to expand on what Cupim said by adding the fact that Google does provide some human translations, especially, but not exclusively, on more common languages and phrases, which is something Bing could never beat (until they make their own, But It's Not Google). 

 

For example, Arabic, which is notoriously hard to translate to:

 

Hu0oQnZ.png

QTeJ9gJ.png

 

Hu0oQnZ.png

 

This means when you're not throwing random phrases to "prove it's effectiveness", it works better overall because of the fact that most conversational phrases (and who knows what else) are community translated.

 

Let's also not forget Google provides almost double the languages.

  • Award 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who doesn't approve the suggestion,

 

Check here: "General Support" and will see a lot of bad translations :) 

 

But if you think it still bad can be solved in a simple way. 

 

Add a option that allow the user to select if he want to use Bing or Google,  too easy.

 

 

@Daniel do you speak Arabic? Not sure.. But confirm which translation is better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know from YEARS of personal experience that Bing is better and more accurate. (turkish, arabic, spanish,croatian, hungarian,greek, and serbian languages )

However...I do not know that it would suit an applications needs or xats easier.

I like the idea of the translator being replaced with bing if it can be done easily.  

  • Award 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Christina said:

I know from YEARS of personal experience that Bing is better and more accurate. (turkish, arabic, spanish,croatian, hungarian,greek, and serbian languages )

However...I do not know that it would suit an applications needs or xats easier.

I like the idea of the translator being replaced with bing if it can be done easily.  

It can be done quite easily, and has by a couple of people as proof of concepts.

It requires no changes to the app, only switching from the Google API to the Bing API on the request page, which those people could provide them with, if xat does not want to do it themselves, if this was decided to be a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The translate app is just a page called "translate1.php" that should verify if the user has days and also to translate/return JSON for the main app(.SWF)

 

It's a simple thing to be changed. I can say this because I used it already and also because it has a lot of methods to be used (free / paid).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jedi said:

What's about a button to switch to Google or Bing API? (um)

Should be nice, a "select" to "Bing" or "Google"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Jedi said:

What's about a button to switch to Google or Bing API? (um)

Good point. Save in flash vars or something, easy.

People would be able to use whichever is their preference without complaint (haha users not complaining, good one).

  • Award 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Remember that both services cost money, it might be as easy as 123 but it's not free.

https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/cognitive-services/translator-text-api/

 

https://cloud.google.com/translate/pricing

 

$20 per 1,000,000 characters* (Google)

$10  (Per million characters) that is same. (Bing)

 

Uh ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Laming said:

$20 per 1,000,000 characters* (Google)

$10  (Per million characters) that is same. (Bing)

Are you sure those are the same?

 

My point was that paying for both is (you guessed it) more than paying for one, and are admins going to pay for it?

  • Award 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that for xat's needs, Google's translator is just fine. Not really worth switching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4180fecf049e4250ac92f0419ea5a2ef.png

Well, I bought a license for testing only(4,000,000 chars).

 

ed00cc11e9ca4747b906e7f785d989d0.png

 

^^ this is a preview using Bing Translator.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.