Live data from Hacker News

The next version of DuckDuckGo

next.duckduckgo.com

61–70 of 331 posts

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#61
I use DuckDuckGo as my primary search engine and have had a positive experience using it.

This redesign incorporates two of the worst design trends today: very low contrast text and gratuitously, obnoxiously large fixed headers.

I dislike fixed headers on any non-phone/tablet UI because almost all laptop and desktop screens are widescreen. Fixed position elements on the sides of the screen make much more sense, although poor implementations are very unpleasant and can create a jarring parallax effect. Unfortunately, fixed elements on the sides are soooo MySpace and have fallen out fashion, and many sites waste most of the space on the sides. The header in the redesign in obscenely large and the new page shows me less results at a time.

I have young and healthy eyes with 20/20 vision. Even so, when I use my laptop for coding and reading text, I turn the brightness down because it is easier on my eyes and does not give me headaches. I believe that the best practice is to make text #000 on a white background or very light background (like news.yc does), and to let users adjust the brightness of their display if this is uncomfortable. There have been assertions by that lighter text with white is better (and unfortunately this is the latest and laziest design trend), but I have seen no formal evidence of this and believe that this is mostly a combination of overbright display screens and poor text rendering by OSes and browsers. If you turn the brightness of your screen down, you solve the "too much contrast" problem (if it ever truly existed) and can tell when any text isn't #000. For me, DuckDuckgo's current snippet display color is to light at #333, and ridiculous at #595959. If I set the brightness of my laptop to the maximum setting, the snippet text is more tolerable but still uncomfortable.

I dislike the neo-flat, iOS-like buttons, but they don't really make the site any harder to use. I find that neo-flat buttons are almost have an underlying hypocrisy. The idea behind the flat painting movement is that you can discern what was called "optical depth" without using traditional perspective to mimic the depth you see with stereoscopic vision. The neo-flat movement is based on the idea that you don't need to underline hyperlinks or add perspective based shadows and gradients to distinguish what a button is because you can just use colors alone or make everything a link. If this were really true, then you wouldn't need to make the neo-flat buttons change colors when you mouse over them, because it should be obvious that they are links. You can see similar hypocrisy in Google's A/B testing of non-centered labels in certain neo-flat buttons on their websites (especially YouTube).

Edit: I rewrote the first sentence of the third paragraph to make it more clear.

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#62
I hate to say this, because I am a BIG fan of DuckDuckGo, but I think your ranking algorithm can be improved.

I collect domains for my open source project, OpenDomain. The sites do not actually have too much valuable content - just placeholders so people can find them.

I just checked, and quite a few of my domains are listed very highly on DDG. Not that I am complaining, but I think they are rated high just because the keywords are in the domains themselves.

For example, "NoSQL", "JSON", "Free TV", "liposculpture", "WebPlatform", and "Helpher" all scored top hits for my sites.

I am not asking for my sites to be removed specifically, but we should try to get better results - I have done NOTHING for SEO on these domains - just owned the keyword.

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#63
I'm not up to date on what kind of algorithm you're using, but last I checked you were still mostly relying on Bing, is that true? Are you guys working on your own search/indexing engine so you don't depend on any of the big guys that might eventually pull the rug from under you?

I guess what I'm saying is, if Microsoft were to deny you access to Bing tomorrow, would DDG still be a pretty good search engine, or would it fall apart?

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#64

Looks great! Your new maps need to have an on-map credit to OpenStreetMap, as that's where the map data comes from, and OSM's licence requires attribution. osm.org/copyright explains how.

It does. Click the "i" button: Map data © OpenStreetMap contributors, CC-BY-SA

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#65

Well kudos on letting my right click and copy URL from search results! I hate how Google insists on using https://www.google.com.bo/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=we... - yeah Google, totally makes sense. Godspeed duckduckgo!

The reason Google sends you through a redirect instead of directly to the site is to prevent those sites from tracking what you searched to get there. When websites look in their referrer header they'll see http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rc...url=http%3A%2F%2Fexample... instead of "https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=example".

This gives them the advantage of you only being able to see what Google Searches brought people to their site through Google Analytics.

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#66
post #45

If you are using DuckDuckGo for privacy reasons, I strongly suggest you use https://startpage.com/ instead. DuckDuckGo isn't much better than Google; both of them hijack your links. This gives an opportunity to track what you click on. If you watch carefully your links go to "r.duckduckgo.com" -- this page also doesn't use SSL. For example: http://r.duckduckgo.com/l/?kh=-1&uddg=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikip... StartPage doe…

I don't see it; links on ddg are always direct to me; perhaps it's only for advertising links or something like anonym.to to hide some referer you'd send otherwise. What browser are you using?

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#67
post #59
post #52

Based in US, the line "The search engine that doesn't track you" means nothing.

Yes it does? The search engine won't track you, but that doesn't stop your ISP or anyone else along the chain.

I mean that the guarantee from an US-based company that they won't track you is meaningless, because they can be ordered in secret court to hand over all their information with a gag order.

After that the only way for us to know would be a whistleblower. And even then we would only know that we are unsafe, not that we are safe.

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#68

I use DuckDuckGo as my primary search engine and have had a positive experience using it. This redesign incorporates two of the worst design trends today: very low contrast text and gratuitously, obnoxiously large fixed headers. I dislike fixed headers on any non-phone/tablet UI because almost all laptop and desktop screens are widescreen. Fixed position elements on the sides of the screen make much more sense, altho…

I agree with what you say in general, but the new DDG page looks pretty good to me, because all of that stuff seems to be done purposefully, to put the focus on the search bar, and not let your eyes stray to other places on the page too much, every single time you do a search. I think all the other stuff is supposed to fade into the background.

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#70
post #2

Hi all, thanks for checking it out and we're looking forward to your feedback! This next version of DuckDuckGo is in public beta. Here's the post about it I just made: https://duck.co/forum/thread/5726/duckduckgo-reimagined-and-... There are still a lot known issues that we're still working through before we can make the transition. I'm sure this thread will uncover more :)

Bug Report

  1. I search for "ng angular", which takes me to https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=ng%20angular
  2. I've been to the top link before (http://angular-ui.github.io/ng-grid/).
  3. I hover over the 'Visited Site' checkbox icon, and the hover text is obscured by the search area (specifically around the Image and Video tabs).
On a related note, I find the interaction with checkboxes a little bit confusing. They disappear on hover when the text shows up (seems unnecessary, I'm left wondering why my icon disappeared). You can also hover over them on unvisited links and get the same message. Personally I'd prefer to see them as static icons, only shown on visited sites. I can hover over existing ones to get a message "you've visited this site before", which is clearer than "your browser indicates...". They do send a very clear message and are a great addition to the UI.

Overall great job. Looks super clean, I love the image and video dropdowns... keep making it easy for me to use DDG!

Edit: also submitted through your feedback system. Just gotta grab those hacker news points while they're there for the picking right? ;)

Post reply on HN