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

Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

namepros.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 435 posts

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#321

Post by adventured »

electrograv wrote: post #301
rpeden wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's a geographic thing? I feel like anyone who grew up in a region where duck, duck goose was a common game for children to play wouldn't be too confused about the name. Not that being confused about the name or disliking it is a bad thing. But I like the name, and it's part of the reason I chose to start using DDG. If they changed it to something more generic, I'd be less likely to keep using it because I'd f…

Oh, I'm fully familiar with the game it's referring to. I just don't understand the connection between a serious search engine and a silly child's game. Is it some kind of inside joke? I just don't get it. I have nothing against the child's game; it just makes no sense to anyone that they named it after that, and it's not an easy name to pronounce or type. Bottom line: It sounds, feels, and looks bad on them.

Keep in mind, Google was roundly mocked initially as a ridiculous name that sounded like a word a baby/child might say.

Google, Bing, Yahoo!, A9 Search, Excite, AltaVista, Overture, Inktomi, Lycos, HotBot, DogPile, Mamma.com., Teoma, Ask Jeeves, Cuil.

Those are all ridiculous names if you want to scale them by seriousness.

Then you have MSN Search, AOL / NetFind, InfoSeek, GoTo, LookSmart, WebCrawler, alltheweb. Slightly less ridiculous sounding, which ultimately that didn't make any difference.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#322

Post by BLanen »

ElijahLynn wrote: post #258

Nice! Now DuckDuckGo needs to just change their name to Duck Search and it can be used as a verb. No longer will you have to say "Did you DuckDuckGo it?" and can instead say "Did you Duck it?". Even on the domain alone I will use Duck more since I won't have to type in the full DuckDuckGo.com domain. I _feel_ like this could really bring some measurable growth to Duck search. I _feel_ like I certainly will use it mor…

Yea, seems like a great oppertunity for a re-branding around this domain.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#323

Post by johnfn »

cosmojg wrote: post #274

NamePros user, Thelma, made a good point: > The story of Microsoft floating a significant loan to Apple in order to keep Apple solvent in the late '90's is well-known. Microsoft didn't do so out of altruistic impulse; they did so to decrease the odds they'd be the target of anti-trust legislation. I'm sure the c-suite at Google is very aware of that history lesson, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a more likely anti…

Is this not just a classic example of HN looking for the negative in every positive? Apple was on the brink of bankruptcy and MS pushed them off it. Conversely, DDG is nowhere near bankruptcy and although it may be easier to type, a shorter domain name is not going to drastically increase the competitive edge that DDG has over google. To me they seem in totally different categories.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#324

Post by asadkn »

Having heard and tried DuckDuckGo many times over the years, the other day, I thought about giving it the nth try, to finally switch from Google.

And what did I type? duckgogo.com.

I'm sure there are others who find the name not so memorable. duck.com makes it simple.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#325

Post by TheKarateKid »

johnfn wrote: post #323
cosmojg wrote: post #274

NamePros user, Thelma, made a good point: > The story of Microsoft floating a significant loan to Apple in order to keep Apple solvent in the late '90's is well-known. Microsoft didn't do so out of altruistic impulse; they did so to decrease the odds they'd be the target of anti-trust legislation. I'm sure the c-suite at Google is very aware of that history lesson, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a more likely anti…

Is this not just a classic example of HN looking for the negative in every positive? Apple was on the brink of bankruptcy and MS pushed them off it. Conversely, DDG is nowhere near bankruptcy and although it may be easier to type, a shorter domain name is not going to drastically increase the competitive edge that DDG has over google. To me they seem in totally different categories.

> Is this not just a classic example of HN looking for the negative in every positive?

A company single-handedly helping to save a direct competitor defies all business logic and obligations to shareholders of that company. The truth is this was a business move to benefit Microsoft, even though it had a benevolent factor to it.

Thinking otherwise is overly optimistic, similar to how you believe it being a classic example of HN pessimism.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#326

Post by opo »

cosmojg wrote: post #274

NamePros user, Thelma, made a good point: > The story of Microsoft floating a significant loan to Apple in order to keep Apple solvent in the late '90's is well-known. Microsoft didn't do so out of altruistic impulse; they did so to decrease the odds they'd be the target of anti-trust legislation. I'm sure the c-suite at Google is very aware of that history lesson, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a more likely anti…

>...The story of Microsoft floating a significant loan to Apple in order to keep Apple solvent in the late '90's is well-known.

That might be well known, but it never happened. To resolve a patent violation and alleged stolen source code, Microsoft bought 150 million dollars of Apple stock. (There were other aspects of the agreement, but there was no loan.)

Your general point was likely right - Microsoft could have dragged out the trial for years and they likely didn't want to be seen as the only maker of OS software for personal computers.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#327

Post by adventured »

zanmat0 wrote: post #266
nroets wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be the only one, but I do think most companies don't use my data for evil purposes. For example, if a search engine can track me on the web, they can deduce which web page answered my query. Then they put that page near the top of the list the next time anyone runs the same query. Furthermore: if a retailer can use my location data to predict demand, they can optimize their logistics and save fuel.

> if a retailer can use my location data to predict demand, they can optimize their logistics and save fuel. Do you think those cost-savings will be passed down onto you?

Cheaper prices will always matter and will never cease to be one of the primary competitive angles.

Most of retail is notoriously competitive. The savings are likely to be passed down at some point. In general retail if you can persistently charge 5% less than the competition across the board, you're the next Walmart.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#328

Post by freeflight »

dirkgently wrote: post #174
freeflight wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To be honest I've never noticed the filter bubble everybody is talking about with Google. It's extremely obvious/bad when you try Googling some old article about an topic, often political, that has recently regained popularity. You can try adding all kinds of words from the headline, certain terms will always lead to the results being dominated with "current news", like with Russia/Ukraine or more recently with Chi…

To me, it seems all this long explanation is just posturing when a simple example would have proven your point.

The simple example here being how Google seems to prioritize "current news", particularly those clicked the most often, over actual search results.

Which from the outside feels very similar to how YouTube tends to "harmonize" it's dynamic playlists aka "mixes" to such a point that all of them end up being the same after the first 1-2 songs because everything after that seems to be strictly based on personalization and not the original song the mix was created on.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#329

Post by freeflight »

wildmusings wrote: post #136
freeflight wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To be honest I've never noticed the filter bubble everybody is talking about with Google. It's extremely obvious/bad when you try Googling some old article about an topic, often political, that has recently regained popularity. You can try adding all kinds of words from the headline, certain terms will always lead to the results being dominated with "current news", like with Russia/Ukraine or more recently with Chi…

You can specify a date range in Google btw. You click “tools” and then it will present a date option.

I remember it being there, but for whatever reason, I was always looking for it under "extended search". Thanks for pointing me in the right direction!

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#330

Post by mcbutterbunz »

TheKarateKid wrote: post #325
johnfn wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this not just a classic example of HN looking for the negative in every positive? Apple was on the brink of bankruptcy and MS pushed them off it. Conversely, DDG is nowhere near bankruptcy and although it may be easier to type, a shorter domain name is not going to drastically increase the competitive edge that DDG has over google. To me they seem in totally different categories.

> Is this not just a classic example of HN looking for the negative in every positive? A company single-handedly helping to save a direct competitor defies all business logic and obligations to shareholders of that company. The truth is this was a business move to benefit Microsoft, even though it had a benevolent factor to it. Thinking otherwise is overly optimistic, similar to how you believe it being a classic exa…

I agree in the case of Microsoft/Apple. In Google/DDG we're talking about transferring a domain name from one company to another, not saving a direct competitor.
Post reply on HN