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

DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

bitlog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 490 posts

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#91

Post by dhimes »

whalesalad wrote: post #46
chuckgreenman wrote: post #25

I think I've figured out what is happening when people tell me that DuckDuckGo's results "aren't good enough". What's really happening is that they've been trained to search a certain way to using Google and because DDG doesn't have all the historical data of your searches on their platform they can't fill in the gaps as well. After a couple days using DDG I found the right vocabulary to get good local results and wh…

A lot of DDG fans on HN blame the user or social conditioning and use that as a crutch. It’s BS. You need to provide clear examples of the differences in order to really make this argument to someone who might switch. What specifically are the differences? The last time this topic came up someone told me I was a total noob because I didn’t know how to use search and that was basically the extent of it.

It might be more effective if you try it yourself. Google something you normally google, then repeat the search with &pws=0 at the end of the query string.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#92

Post by nkingsy »

DuckDuckGo is a for profit company. There are no guarantees it will not seek more profits at a later date. See: Google.

That being said, competition that hurts Google’s bottom line would likely result in better behavior.

Ddg has a long way to go to be an impactful competitor in the market, though.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#93

Post by AdamSC1 »

speps wrote: post #11

It's only good enough when you're in the US, I live in the UK and DDG consistently returns non local results even though the country is set correctly, it's especially annoying given how many US cities are named after their UK counterpart.

Do you have the UK toggle turned on? Improving local results internationally is a major priority for the team currently - if you find queries where this isn't working well, hitting the feedback button in the bottom right of the screen is a huge help!

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#94

Post by UncleMeat »

Semaphor wrote: post #51
questionfor wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you share what is the right vocabulary for example? I have DDG as main engine for the phone and unless it’s Wikipedia level question, I have to use g!

Don’t use natural language, use keywords and quotes. Essentially the way people searched 5-10 years ago. I rarely need !g

> Don’t use natural language

So... its worse. People want to use natural language.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#95

Post by mrcu5 »

richthegeek wrote: post #76
chuckgreenman wrote: post #25

I think I've figured out what is happening when people tell me that DuckDuckGo's results "aren't good enough". What's really happening is that they've been trained to search a certain way to using Google and because DDG doesn't have all the historical data of your searches on their platform they can't fill in the gaps as well. After a couple days using DDG I found the right vocabulary to get good local results and wh…

Today I was trying to find info about Corpus Christi - a Polish film that won some awards lately. DDG gives me information about a place in Texas, including stuff from the local newspaper and attractions. I'm searching from a Poland IP btw. Anyway, the actual film was at the very end of the first page of results for me. It certainly feels like it priotises things weirdly. Google Maps has a similar issue though: plent…

Did you include the word "film" in your search? Otherwise there's no reasonable expectation for it to show up. It's like searching for "Philadelphia" and expecting the movie to show up and not the city.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#96

Post by bloaf »

Waterluvian wrote: post #60
chuckgreenman wrote: post #25

I think I've figured out what is happening when people tell me that DuckDuckGo's results "aren't good enough". What's really happening is that they've been trained to search a certain way to using Google and because DDG doesn't have all the historical data of your searches on their platform they can't fill in the gaps as well. After a couple days using DDG I found the right vocabulary to get good local results and wh…

I've been a DDG booster for a while. Their search results are usually good enough. Except after longer use I've found two major issues that eventually forced me back to Google: 1. I can Image Search the most basic of terms and literally get "No Results Found" once or twice a day. Sometimes I'll get like... 8 photos. 2. I will weirdly get the Wikipedia link for a relevant query, but the British or Spanish or some othe…

3. You can't search for "older than" results. For example, if you want news reports about Ukrainian corruption, but only from before 2015, you're out of luck on ddg, have fun reading about Trump.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#97

Post by weystrom »

richthegeek wrote: post #76
chuckgreenman wrote: post #25

I think I've figured out what is happening when people tell me that DuckDuckGo's results "aren't good enough". What's really happening is that they've been trained to search a certain way to using Google and because DDG doesn't have all the historical data of your searches on their platform they can't fill in the gaps as well. After a couple days using DDG I found the right vocabulary to get good local results and wh…

Today I was trying to find info about Corpus Christi - a Polish film that won some awards lately. DDG gives me information about a place in Texas, including stuff from the local newspaper and attractions. I'm searching from a Poland IP btw. Anyway, the actual film was at the very end of the first page of results for me. It certainly feels like it priotises things weirdly. Google Maps has a similar issue though: plent…

So does Google, "Corpus Christi" is too ambiguous.

"Corpus Christi polish film" is good enough. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Corpus+Christi+polish+film&t=ffab&...

"Corpus Christi film" also works, results look relevant, but knowledge graph shows the old 2014 Venezuelan movie. This is where Google is way superior, it showed me average score on imdb and even local showtimes.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#98

Post by frenchyatwork »

Waterluvian wrote: post #60
chuckgreenman wrote: post #25

I think I've figured out what is happening when people tell me that DuckDuckGo's results "aren't good enough". What's really happening is that they've been trained to search a certain way to using Google and because DDG doesn't have all the historical data of your searches on their platform they can't fill in the gaps as well. After a couple days using DDG I found the right vocabulary to get good local results and wh…

I've been a DDG booster for a while. Their search results are usually good enough. Except after longer use I've found two major issues that eventually forced me back to Google: 1. I can Image Search the most basic of terms and literally get "No Results Found" once or twice a day. Sometimes I'll get like... 8 photos. 2. I will weirdly get the Wikipedia link for a relevant query, but the British or Spanish or some othe…

> ... the British or .. some other version often isn't even in English.

There's only one regular English version of the Wikipedia, unless you're refering to the Galic one, which would be a little odd (https://ga.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pr%C3%ADomhleathanach).

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#100

Post by stiglitz »

Anyone got a specific search term that gave poor results on ddg compared to google or vice versa?

I see zero specific examples in the comments right now. For all I know, you people are searching for “howbakecarrotsovengsgshd”. In my experience there’s no difference in quality worth talking about between any of the popular search engines.

Post reply on HN