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

181–190 of 251 posts

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#181

Post by IndexPointer »

kucing wrote: post #103
Kiro wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://help.duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/results/so... > We also of course have more traditional links in the search results, which we also source from a variety of partners, including Verizon Media (formerly Yahoo) and Bing.

> In fact, DuckDuckGo gets its results from over four hundred sources. These include hundreds of vertical sources delivering niche Instant Answers, DuckDuckBot (our crawler) and crowd-sourced sites (like Wikipedia, stored in our answer indexes). We also of course have more traditional links in the search results, which we also source from a variety of partners, including Verizon Media (formerly Yahoo) and Bing. Hmm I…

I believe it's only Bing and yandex for web, and other sources for the other things, but I don't have a source right now.

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#182

Post by gharding »

If you are Google, would it be in your interest to support a supposed competitor, who really is only just aggregating Google search results mashed up with others like Bing, that appear to basically produce the same results as Google; in order to at least be able to make the claim that you are not a monopoly?

Does your answer change when you consider that Google gave the duck.com domain to DDG a few months ago?

If that does not change your opinion, why would a competitor that controls a rather pivotal assets like an extremely valuable domain like duck.com to what is presented as a competitor to Google?

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#183

Post by mattmanser »

FabHK wrote: post #163
soheil wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I must not be really needing search much, because I almost never switch to another search engine (let alone google, which would be my last resort).

DDG is terrible at any location type search and extremely US centric.

You can switch to country mode but then it stops including loads of results.

A perfect example is when you search for a product or book or something. Without the switch, it returns the company website and amazon.com, the latter being utterly useless and irrelevant to anyone outside the US.

But if you turn the switch on, the company website disappears, but you get amazon.co.uk.

Or another example, I was searching for a butternut squash soup recipe. Oddly DDG had no BBC food results. Until I clicked the switch, then it did, but loads of good other recipes completely disappeared.

As for bar, restaurant, etc. names, ugh. DDG is useless.

They need to figure out how to do local searches with privacy, a way I can set a rough location and they remember it.

At the moment their location centric searches are a decade behind Google.

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#184

Post by klingonopera »

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…

I was disappointed wih DDG's regional results, especially since it seemed to have correctly identified my location.

What I only realized after a year or so, was that it defaults to off, and you actually need to turn it on, to get regional results. ("Oh, that's a button? Huh, I thought it was just graphics...")

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#185

Post by IndexPointer »

mkl wrote: post #124
Dig1t wrote: post #2

Hell yeah, this is really good thing to see! I've been 100% DDG for ~6 months now and almost never have to use !g anymore. Part of the problem was getting over the anxiety of wanting to double check with Google every time I use the service. 99% of the time I use !g I get the same results as what I got from DDG anyway. Plus having the dark theme saves my eyes and battery.

A dark theme only saves battery on an OLED or CRT screen. LCD screens (i.e. most) use slightly more energy displaying black than white. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-b...

I believe most phones are OLED now..

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#186

Post by silverwings »

paulintrognon wrote: post #158
grimgrin wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a thing I wish FF had that Chrome has had for a long, long time (an older comment of mine): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20056174 re: ease of searching within sites and building that availability (of sites) up

I don't understand the behavior your are talking about. I tried in Google Chrome and could not figure it out. In Chrome's address bar, you type the name of a site (say reddit.com), then tab, then some keywords, and that does a google search for your keywords inside reddit.com?

On chrome://settings/searchEngines you can see all the search engines and their search queries listed. In the keyword column, you can also see the associated keyword. This means if you wanted to search in npmjs.com, then type npmjs.com and then a space in the omnibar. Ofcourse, if you wanted to make it shorter, you can edit the keyword in the same page to say `npm`, then you can search by using npm followed by a space or tab

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#188

Post by hvasilev »

diffeomorphism wrote: post #129
hvasilev wrote: post #96

3.5 billion queries for google daily, 54 mil daily record for DDG. That means that google achieves the daily record for DDG for slightly more than 14 minutes. It is incredibly hard / nearly impossible to compete against a tech monopoly in its core business grounds. I would like to switch to DDG, but for me the google results are definitely more relevant than the DDG results. I wish it was otherwise.

I don't think the comparison against google is all that interesting because it is such an extreme outlier. How about comparing against the second most popular search engine? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_search_engine#Market_share If I am reading this correctly, ddg has about one fifth as much marketshare as the second place, which is quite impressive.

Why would that be interesting, they have no market share?

Bing has less than 3%, it operates at a loss. Not even MS cares about it and they just keep it around as a part of the technological suite that they have in order to convince the government that they are not a tech monopoly, even though everyone know they are. All big guys do this trick in one way or another.

For that reason I don't think one should compare DDG with anyone but google.

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#189

Post by kqr »

IndexPointer wrote: post #185
mkl wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A dark theme only saves battery on an OLED or CRT screen. LCD screens (i.e. most) use slightly more energy displaying black than white. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-b...

I believe most phones are OLED now..

Most Samsung phones, maybe. A lot of other brands are not using OLED.

Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic

#190

Post by Kiro »

klingonopera wrote: post #173
dfrankow wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't ddg Bing results?

Quite sure Qwant does, but DDG does appear to have their own unique results. For your convenience: https://www.google.com/search?q=keris https://duckduckgo.com/?q=keris https://www.bing.com/search?q=keris https://www.qwant.com/?q=keris https://yandex.com/search/?text=keris

Try "what is my ip" and you will see that DDG displays 207.46.13.131 in the cached snippets, which is Microsoft Bingbot and also the same IP that Bing shows in their cached snippets.
Post reply on HN