Live data from Hacker News

DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

bitlog.com

341–350 of 490 posts

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#341
post #336

A few years ago I switched my desktops to use DDG while leaving my phone using Google. At first I had to !g all the time. Now that’s rare. Now I’m starting to have the other problem. If I search for a company, product, person, etc., on DDG it’s the first hit. But on google I just get a wall of ads and videos, and it’s hard to tell where the actual homepage is for the thing I’m looking for. So as of now I would say, g…

I just googled DDG and nowhere on the front page did I see DuckDuckGo. Interesting, although not too surprising.

Note: The Duckduckgo site is the first result for "Duck Duck Go", you mean the string "DDG" in particular I'm presuming.

Now, it's not Google's obligation to make Duck Duck go a primary result for the DDG abbreviation - DDG the artist is apparently quite popular.

It would be nice, yes, if Google didn't just guess the best meaning for DDG but instead gave a spectrum of the common meanings (though Duck Duck Go might still not deserve to appear unless it's search became better imo).

The way that Google has degenerated over the last 5-10 years is in more aggressively showing you what they think you want rather than what you ask for (and limiting how you ask for things to boot). But after using Duck Go Go for two years, it seems they have exactly the same problem and that situation explained by them being a meta-search engine leaning on Bing (which in turn clones Google). At least Duckgogo features themselves on a search for DDG but they lean more heavily on battleship with the name.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#342
post #336

A few years ago I switched my desktops to use DDG while leaving my phone using Google. At first I had to !g all the time. Now that’s rare. Now I’m starting to have the other problem. If I search for a company, product, person, etc., on DDG it’s the first hit. But on google I just get a wall of ads and videos, and it’s hard to tell where the actual homepage is for the thing I’m looking for. So as of now I would say, g…

I just googled DDG and nowhere on the front page did I see DuckDuckGo. Interesting, although not too surprising.

That's because there's a popular musical artist called DDG with tens of millions of streams, because guided missile destroyers are designated DDG by the US military and NATO, and because not many people refer to DuckDuckGo as DDG.

If I search for "Alternatives to Google Search," I do see DuckDuckGo, including answers to questions like "Is DuckDuckGo Better than Google," with the answer being yes, it is.

If I search for "duck search", Duck Duck Go is the first option. If I search for "Privacy Search Engine", DuckDuckGo is the fourth result.

I don't think there's any conspiracy here.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#343
post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For something obscure, Google ignores three out of four keywords and just produces drivel.

This has become increasingly frustrating for me, and I now have to overuse quoting to get the things I want. Why would I include a word if I wanted results that didn't include it. I could understand that on later pages to include more results, but regularly even the very first results don't include one of the key words in my search.

This drives me insane. In the early days you only got exact matches, now in an effort to sell more ads, or be more “helpful” you get random crap. I would pay for a search that only returned results with the words you entered.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies buy those ads on their own search results so a competitor can't target them for advertising

Agreed as that’s my assumption. Do you have first-hand experience and/or a source?

Every single company I've ever worked for that advertised online had a "cost of doing business" ad budget just for buying their own keyword on Google (and Apple iOS Store/Google Play Store if they had consumer apps). Bigger international companies often have someone from an ad consulting firm tracking the major search engines and buying keywords for all of the big ones like Google, Bing, Yandex, etc.

It's one of those "the sky is blue" type of things in advertising. You NEVER want a competitor to have a shot at advertising to your potential customers, especially when they've gone to the point where they're typing in your name into Google so their conversion rate is likely significantly larger than your average site visitor.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ).

I got the scots one once when I searched for the Hoover dam.

https://sco.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoover_Dam

At first I thought either I was going crazy or the article had been vandalized. But then I figured out that DDG hadn't taken me to the English result.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#347
Very strange timing on what is unfortunately a horribly inaccurate title based on my personal experience.

I tried swapping to DuckDuckGo yesterday on my iPhone as the primary search tool and reverted unfortunately back to Google after only two hours.

It’s hard to define all of the reasons the ‘mobile’ experience is so unbearable, but I’ll try:

1) No video or image results at the top of the page when that is most relevant.

2) No IMDB/overviews for movies, music, books, etc.

3) I am used to one of the first results in my search consistently being Wikipedia. This was the case about 1/3rd of the time vs. Google.

4) Results often appeared extremely out of order in terms of relevancy vs. Google, with the actual relevant like often being on the second(!) page.

5) Personal taste, but super relevant - In terms of UI/UX, the interface feels dated, actually harkening back to the days of AltaVista - I’m unfortunately honest when I say I feel like I’m using something designed 10-15 years ago.

6) Autocomplete seemed to have significant issues, and, for some reason, sometimes even taking several seconds to appear.

I couldn’t express my disappointment enough. I really wanted to give up the ghost, and just move on from Google - but I am so used to so many of the apparently fantastic nuances of Google, I believe it will unfortunately take 4-5 years before I can even get past enough of these significant issues to make it worth using.

On Desktop - the experience seems to be significantly better. I can’t even point out enough reasons why it’s so poor on mobile, it could unfortunately fill several blog posts and I don’t have time to point out the myriad of issues and inconsistencies here at this time.

If there’s jobs available at DDG - I’d love to help, in all seriousness.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My story is the same! Also, when I want colouring pictures for my kids, DDG just lets met tap them and print them. That is nolonger possible using Google since some months. I also very much appreciate the code snippets when (already started typing "Googling"!) Searching for code related things.

Now "google" is a common enough word for generic online searches that the sentence "I googled 'australian licorice' using DuckDuckGo's image search" doesn't sound weird to me. See definition 2, under the transitive verb form of the second etymology: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/google#English

That still sounds weird to me. I obviously understand what you mean, but I still don't like the idea of saying "I googled x on DuckDuckGo".

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#349

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 never log in to Google’s services in the browser[1]; clear my cookies on browser close; use several other blocking methods for privacy; and have been using DDG as my main search engine for years.

Yet, I’ve used `!g` more in the last months than ever before. In my usage, DDG’s results are getting noticeably worse. It’s unlikely I’ve forgotten “how to use it”.

[1]: I only log in to a Google account for Gmail, and always on an app.

Re: DuckDuckGo is good enough for regular use

#350

Very strange timing on what is unfortunately a horribly inaccurate title based on my personal experience. I tried swapping to DuckDuckGo yesterday on my iPhone as the primary search tool and reverted unfortunately back to Google after only two hours. It’s hard to define all of the reasons the ‘mobile’ experience is so unbearable, but I’ll try: 1) No video or image results at the top of the page when that is most rele…

It's not going to be convenient to get off any Google product. If privacy and escaping algorithm bubbles is important enough to you, DDG can probably be "good enough".
Post reply on HN