2.  Machine translation is 70 years old. (first presentation at Georgetown University in 1954)  Trados is 30 years old.  World Wide Web is 25 years old.  Google is 16 years old.  Facebook is 10 years old.  YouTube is 8 years old (so is Twitter!). 2

4.  Larger screens with higher resolution. No need to shorten the strings so often.  Changing habits. PCs seem outdated and are now used almost strictly for work; tablets and smartphones are used to quickly check information on the web.  Displays on appliances that used to have no screens. Google buys Nest for 3.2 bln USD, energy monitoring software. Displays on new devices = new source texts to translate?  Wearable electronics are getting more popular, so more terms will need to be developed; *slide* and *tap* may not be enough to describe the way users interact with device sensors  Voice-recognition software is getting better and better. Have you tried the recent editions in your own language?  D evices are far more intuitive than 10 years ago, BUT does easier to use mean less documentation? 4

5.  Modern UI replacing the classical approach. Visual changes to UI (i.e. moving the buttons to another view) will always have a huge impact on larger projects – sometimes meaning hundreds of work hours for linguistic teams.  AGILE is everywhere. Consequences: short lifecycle, frequent or even continuous delivery, urgent projects. More difficult work for translators (?).  Many small software updates. Fewer solutions built from scratch.  GUI localization software (Catalyst, Passolo, LocStudio) may be used less often if visualization is not possible (functions have not yet been written, AGILE…) and smart re-scaling is embedded in the framework.  Synchronization on multiple devices has become standard. Everyone constantly moves from one workspace to another. Laptops are no longer a synonym of mobile work. 5

6.  Focus on privacy. The “share everything” generation has recently discovered the danger of third party data collection. Snowden and his actions put the focus back on privacy. Could this be the next selling point for CAT tool providers with security and full privacy as competitive advantages? When NDAs are not enough, should we expect technical restrictions for translators when it comes to plugging into online solutions?  Cyberthreats. As everything moves more and more online (inevitable), the risk grows. At the same time, hackers/crackers have become more professional and are involved in large scale operations. So far, the translation industry has never been a real target. So far.  Kickstarter and translation projects. A product has not been localized and the corporation doesn’t have a budget to get things done? Why not allow users to pay for the localization they demand and offer them special bonuses in return. Already happening: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/fred/emoji-dick?ref=yir2013http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/fred/emoji-dick?ref=yir2013  Moving the translator’s workspace from one device to another, and keeping the same preferences, browser selection, settings. An obvious next step for all CAT tool manufacturers.  More and more video content = higher demand for subtitling / voice-overs (?), possible area of development for audiovisual CATs? 6