Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DuckDuckGo Traffic

duckduckgo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 251 posts

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#11

Post by soheil »

LilBytes wrote: post #5
nbrempel wrote: post #3

Over the past 5 years I’ve tried DDG several times. Each time except the last I wanted to stick with it but the results simply didn’t stand up to what I’d see on Google. About 6 months ago (a year? I can’t remember) I switched and haven’t looked back. Now, when I look at google, the results actually look less relevant. As well, the ads on Google have become very obnoxious. I don’t feel like I’m being served the best…

I've had very similar experiences, I'd tried DDG several times over the years but around ~12 months ago I found DDG's usability and quality of searches to jump significantly.

I completely disagree on the quality front. I really wanted DDG to be good and I tried sticking with it for a while. I found usability (reads keyboard shortcuts, special keywords, etc.) a breath of fresh air compared to Google. But it's no substitute for the significant lack of quality results. For when you don't really need search it works great.

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#12

Post by BLKNSLVR »

LilBytes wrote: post #4

I've been using DDG for a while now, my biggest if not only concern with DDG is local specific events or chronologically close events. If my search string has or shares close proximity to either an event in the past or a local event else where of a similar name, I rarely find my results. For instance during the Australian Election recently, if I searched for Australian Election I was never returned results for the el…

Long term Australian DDG user here, and with similar disappointment in getting local search results, but I've grown accustomed to using other tools for that, or using DDG to find other tools for specific Australian search requests in addition to specifying, as you mentioned, locales and or dates.

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#14

Post by teeray »

Bang commands[0] really sealed DDG for me. I know Firefox had install-your-own search plugins forever, but the total lack of friction of typing “!yt badgerbadgerbadger” to get specifically YouTube results was fantastic.

!g (search on Google) also makes it far easier to switch. Don’t like the results? Prefix !g and try again.

My other favorites:

  !sr [name of subreddit] - much faster than “reddit.com/r/[name]”
  !r - Reddit
  !w - Wikipedia
  !cache - get Google’s cache of a page
  !hn - HN Search
  !godoc - Search godoc.org for documentation on a Go package. Your favorite language is probably represented
EDIT: formatting

[0] https://duckduckgo.com/bang

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#15

Post by dfee »

Honest question: what distinguishes DDG from Google or Bing? Why shouldn’t they (or won’t they) follow the same trajectory as our once beloved “don’t be evil” Google of the late 2000s?

I’ve used DDG off and on, and I think the interface is fine (perhaps better these days as Google seems to have gotten worse), but I see the idea of selling clicks as being too lucrative.

Are we just rooting for the downfall of the incumbent / the rise of the underdog?

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#16

Post by SlowRobotAhead »

dfee wrote: post #15

Honest question: what distinguishes DDG from Google or Bing? Why shouldn’t they (or won’t they) follow the same trajectory as our once beloved “don’t be evil” Google of the late 2000s? I’ve used DDG off and on, and I think the interface is fine (perhaps better these days as Google seems to have gotten worse), but I see the idea of selling clicks as being too lucrative. Are we just rooting for the downfall of the incu…

> [You Either Die a Hero, or You Live Long Enough To See Yourself Become the Villain]

There is nothing to say what happened to Google wouldn’t happen to other companies. I assume some leaders have more self-control. But... I think the larger issue at hand isn’t to prevent it with Just One More Law (tm) or anything like that, but to instead actively chose to not use a fallen companies product and increase the awareness that Cool Company is now Evil Company. Let the problem correct itself.

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#17

Post by sansnomme »

nbrempel wrote: post #3

Over the past 5 years I’ve tried DDG several times. Each time except the last I wanted to stick with it but the results simply didn’t stand up to what I’d see on Google. About 6 months ago (a year? I can’t remember) I switched and haven’t looked back. Now, when I look at google, the results actually look less relevant. As well, the ads on Google have become very obnoxious. I don’t feel like I’m being served the best…

DuckDuckGo uses Bing underneath so the company whom you should really be complaining to is MSFT.

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#18

Post by sansnomme »

dfee wrote: post #15

Honest question: what distinguishes DDG from Google or Bing? Why shouldn’t they (or won’t they) follow the same trajectory as our once beloved “don’t be evil” Google of the late 2000s? I’ve used DDG off and on, and I think the interface is fine (perhaps better these days as Google seems to have gotten worse), but I see the idea of selling clicks as being too lucrative. Are we just rooting for the downfall of the incu…

Because their business model is built on privacy and not necessarily search tech. See my previous comment on this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22078338

In many ways they are more like a VPN company — a proxy for hire. If they want to expand, a good way would be to acquire Keybase or maybe something like https://bloom.sh and continue exploiting the inferior Google alternatives market.

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#19

Post by sdrothrock »

teeray wrote: post #14

Bang commands[0] really sealed DDG for me. I know Firefox had install-your-own search plugins forever, but the total lack of friction of typing “!yt badgerbadgerbadger” to get specifically YouTube results was fantastic. !g (search on Google) also makes it far easier to switch. Don’t like the results? Prefix !g and try again. My other favorites: !sr [name of subreddit] - much faster than “reddit.com/r/[name]” !r - Red…

This is an offshoot discussion and I have nothing against DDG or bang commands -- just presenting another side of convenient searches.

> I know Firefox had install-your-own search plugins forever, but the total lack of friction of typing “!yt badgerbadgerbadger” to get specifically YouTube results was fantastic.

I find "use your own search" to be much less friction than going through DDG since it takes me right to results from the custom search, rather than having to redirect through DDG before going to the results. (Edited to add the following) I'm not going to lie and say that it doesn't make me a little paranoid to think of EVERY search I do going through one provider regardless of their current privacy stance.

I've used them since 2002ish in Opera, continued using them in Chrome, and now I use them in Firefox.

AFAIK you don't even need "install-your-own search plugins" -- just right-click on the search box on the site you want to search, and add keyword.

For example, I have "aj" for Amazon Japan and "au" for Amazon US, so I can just hit cmd-t for a new tab and type "au pretzels" directly in the address bar.

This has the advantage of letting you define your own, too.

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#20

Post by throwaway8941 »

teeray wrote: post #14

Bang commands[0] really sealed DDG for me. I know Firefox had install-your-own search plugins forever, but the total lack of friction of typing “!yt badgerbadgerbadger” to get specifically YouTube results was fantastic. !g (search on Google) also makes it far easier to switch. Don’t like the results? Prefix !g and try again. My other favorites: !sr [name of subreddit] - much faster than “reddit.com/r/[name]” !r - Red…

JFYI, there's no need to install anything. Focus on a search field on (almost any) website, open the context menu, and "Add a keyword for this search". Put a letter or two into the "keyword" input. Profit.
Post reply on HN