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

331–340 of 435 posts

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#331

Post by IronBacon »

vhakulinen wrote: post #270
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…

> ...I won't have to type in the full DuckDuckGo.com domain. You can also use ddg.gg.

Thanks wasn't aware of that.

Anyway, I use the Firefox "smart bookmarks" (I don't know if it's the correct name), i.e. naming the bookmark search, so "gg foo" is for searching foo on Google, "dd bar" is for searching bar on DuckDuck, "w baz" is for Wikipedia, "dbts #number" is for the "Debian bug tracking system" and so on...

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#332

Post by scarface74 »

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.

It’s not only looking for the negative. It didn’t happen.

Whatever the reason, MS only infused $150 million into Apple’s coffers.

Apple turned around and used $100 million to buy PowerComputing’s Mac license. Apple also continued to lose money for 3 years. The Net $50 million didn’t “save Apple”.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#333

Post by johnfn »

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 accept that MS/Apple was a competitive move. I’m not sure I accept that duck.com is.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#334

Post by signal11 »

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…

Good point. Mozilla also received (still receives?) a substantial amount of money from Google, no doubt that achieves similar goals -- prop up a competitor -- although it also helps Google make their search engine the default for Firefox users.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#335

Post by cachvico »

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?

No. Google has the monopoly on search (outside of China). Avoiding anti-trust is a huge concern of theirs. Look at MS and IE in the browser wars - they were forced by the EU to build into Windows links/ads to the other browsers - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu#/media/File:B...

Whilst DDG has huge momentum by now, duckduckgo.com is still an ache to type - that's why ddg.co has existed for years, and why you use "DDG" yourself ;) duck.com is way more memorable and even faster.

Not a lawyer, but given DDG's brand recognition, I'd imagine they would have a strong case in an ICANN dispute given that Google are not using it. Google are proactively avoiding at least this bad PR by doing the right thing (this week).

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#336

Post by craigsmansion »

djsumdog wrote: post #278
Tobaz wrote: post #19

I'm hoping the phrase "duck it" will become as widespread as "Google it"

I always say, "Search for," e.g. "I searched for it online" I hate how Google has become a verb and I don't want to see another one named after a company. I miss the days of Lycos, Hotbot, Dogpile, Excite and where you could search for terms on different engines and get different results.

Using, "google" as a verb pretty much started out as a meme-like phenomenon; a bit of an in-joke for the more tech savvy when Google was still rising to prominence.

As these things sometimes go, mass adoption happened. What used to be cute and funny is now free marketing for a search tech behemoth but with people unwilling to give up this initial connotation of "tech savvy."

I've long since reverted to "search online" or "search the web", but I do hope "to duck" gains some prominence; it could be the new "tech savvy" verb to use.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#338

Post by Pete_D »

e17a wrote: post #251
sjroot wrote: post #12

This is cool and I hope it leads to a rebranding. While I like DDG a lot, the name has always felt off-putting to me. I'd much rather say "I'll just search Google" than "I'll just search DuckDuckGo." Does an extra syllable really cause that much additional friction?

DDG will never reach some groups without a rebrand. I once installed Firefox on my folks's PC and changed the browser to DDG. My mum opened it instead of Chrome by mistake and said something like > WTF is this duck thing? Where's Google? I think that wouldn't have happened if it had a more serious name.

Judging from the Wii and the iPad, people will get used to any brand name, no matter how ridiculous it sounds initially.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#339

Post by J_cst »

kevindqc wrote: post #37
projectramo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You had to already know about it though. That is a foul. Or, more accurately, a water-foul.

It's the second result on Google, too: https://www.google.com/search?q=duck Using an incognito window

Nineth for me, Italy, not logged in

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#340

Post by plopz »

r3bl wrote: post #240
ealhad wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially considering there is .rs

Two-letter TLDs are country codes. R epublic of S erbia isn't that big of a stretch, especially since it's relatively new (2008) and there are already so many that follow .s* pattern. Unless you create a new country, .go ain't happening. That being said, Montenegro scored a freaking gold mine with .me.

I just looked up .io, and Wikipedia lists it as a British territory but also says that its in dispute and the only thing actually there are military bases for the US and UK. I wonder why it got a tld?
Post reply on HN