4 Weeks with DuckDuckGo • Hacker News Board

Re: 4 Weeks with DuckDuckGo

#81

Post by edanm » Sun, May 06, 2012, 9:23 AM UTC

ek wrote: post #36

I was discussing this with a colleague recently and I figured I'd mention it on HN the next time DuckDuckGo came up. I feel somewhat silly saying this, but DuckDuckGo is not that great of a name. I love the engine, and have gotten some great results from the few times I have used it, but I really, really wish it were not named DuckDuckGo. It seems tacky to me and it's hard to say. There's a support article that encou…

I have to agree. I know it's stupid, I know it's childish, I know that as a techie I really should know better than to judge a search engine by its name.

But every single time the topic of DuckDuckGo comes up, I find myself thinking that it's a bad name. And I'm not the only one - every time this topic comes up, at least one other person mentions the name thing.

I'm not saying this to be mean, and I'm definitely not saying this because I think I'm "right". I'm only saying this because I truly believe that changing DuckDuckGo's name would make it more popular, and it deserves to be popular.

Re: 4 Weeks with DuckDuckGo

#82

Post by officemonkey » Sun, May 06, 2012, 9:41 AM UTC

tom9729 wrote: post #26

Tyr42 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, !python, in particular, sucks. So don't ! the python. Everything else is a plus though. !hoogle is awesome.

If you can't use it for all sites you want to search, then what's the point? I'm sure python isn't the only site with a bad search.

It just seems he used a useless search on purpose. The !w for wikipedia searches and the !v for youtube searches are as awesome as the !python is lame.

Re: 4 Weeks with DuckDuckGo

#83

Post by officemonkey » Sun, May 06, 2012, 9:45 AM UTC

edanm wrote: post #81

ek wrote: post #36

I was discussing this with a colleague recently and I figured I'd mention it on HN the next time DuckDuckGo came up. I feel somewhat silly saying this, but DuckDuckGo is not that great of a name. I love the engine, and have gotten some great results from the few times I have used it, but I really, really wish it were not named DuckDuckGo. It seems tacky to me and it's hard to say. There's a support article that encou…

I have to agree. I know it's stupid, I know it's childish, I know that as a techie I really should know better than to judge a search engine by its name. But every single time the topic of DuckDuckGo comes up, I find myself thinking that it's a bad name. And I'm not the only one - every time this topic comes up, at least one other person mentions the name thing. I'm not saying this to be mean, and I'm definitely not…

Google had a funny name in 2000. And Yahoo! had a funny name in 1994. I'm sure once they get some cash they'll buy ddg.com from Donoho Design Group LLC and that'll be the end of it.

Re: 4 Weeks with DuckDuckGo

#84

Post by edanm » Sun, May 06, 2012, 9:51 AM UTC

officemonkey wrote: post #83

edanm wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to agree. I know it's stupid, I know it's childish, I know that as a techie I really should know better than to judge a search engine by its name. But every single time the topic of DuckDuckGo comes up, I find myself thinking that it's a bad name. And I'm not the only one - every time this topic comes up, at least one other person mentions the name thing. I'm not saying this to be mean, and I'm definitely not…

Google had a funny name in 2000. And Yahoo! had a funny name in 1994. I'm sure once they get some cash they'll buy ddg.com from Donoho Design Group LLC and that'll be the end of it.

I think you're saying two things, so I'll address each.

1. "Google" and "Yahoo!" seemed funny in 1994, but we're used to them.

It's possible. This is what most people answer about DDG. I think this is wrong. Google and Yahoo!, while funny names, sound "cool". DuckDuckGo doesn't. My memory isn't great, so I can't be sure I'm right about this, but I'm pretty sure that the first time I heard "Google" or "Yahoo!", I had a much better reaction than the first (and every) time I hear "DuckDuckGo".

I also think it's not smart to cling to the "people will get used to it, Google was the same" defense. If it's true, sure. I think it's not, and it's just misleading and true-sounding enough that DuckDuckGo keeps going.

2. The domain name itself is a problem (long, annoying to type, etc.), and once they get ddg it will be better.

I agree on this point, although I do think the name is still an important point, not just for the domain. It's a brand.

I'd like to reiterate that I'm not saying this things to be a critic, or just to be mean. I really value the work of DuckDuckGo, I think it's great that there's good competition to Google, and I'm a fan of Gabriel Weinberg. I'm only saying this because it's an issue that keeps coming up, and I really think it has a bad effect on DuckDuckGo.

Re: 4 Weeks with DuckDuckGo

#85

Post by tonfa » Sun, May 06, 2012, 9:53 AM UTC

blntechie wrote: post #43

prezjordan wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to post a screenshot? I just disabled AdBlock and looks legitimately the same.

Here we go. Original - http://imgur.com/AGM7I Ad-blocked - http://imgur.com/Sj7pe This is from my laptop screen. The first non-ad result is barely visible on the top fold of the page. Thanks to that key word goes to zach from a comment in this thread. The results are pretty astonishing. I'm disappointed on barely how little visual difference exist between an ad and a legitimate result.

It is a commercial query though, organic results are often less relevant.

Re: 4 Weeks with DuckDuckGo

#86

Post by msfd » Sun, May 06, 2012, 9:54 AM UTC

edanm wrote: post #84

officemonkey wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google had a funny name in 2000. And Yahoo! had a funny name in 1994. I'm sure once they get some cash they'll buy ddg.com from Donoho Design Group LLC and that'll be the end of it.

I think you're saying two things, so I'll address each. 1. "Google" and "Yahoo!" seemed funny in 1994, but we're used to them. It's possible. This is what most people answer about DDG. I think this is wrong. Google and Yahoo!, while funny names, sound "cool". DuckDuckGo doesn't. My memory isn't great, so I can't be sure I'm right about this, but I'm pretty sure that the first time I heard "Google" or "Yahoo!", I had…

"2. The domain name itself is a problem (long, annoying to type, etc.), and once they get ddg it will be better."

Actually, you can already use www.ddg.gg, which redirect you to the HTTPS version of DDG.

Re: 4 Weeks with DuckDuckGo

#87

Post by tonfa » Sun, May 06, 2012, 9:54 AM UTC

Legion wrote: post #46

yuriyg wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has provided this for years with the "site:" feature (e.g. search for "lists site:python.org"). In addition, Google uses its own results, since as the article correctly mentions "most site’s internal search engines suck".

> Google has provided this for years with the "site:" feature Which is something completely different, and is also something present in DuckDuckGo.

But chrome and firefox provide it for years, without giving up your queries to a 3rd party search engine.

Re: 4 Weeks with DuckDuckGo

#88

Post by edanm » Sun, May 06, 2012, 9:55 AM UTC

msfd wrote: post #86

edanm wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're saying two things, so I'll address each. 1. "Google" and "Yahoo!" seemed funny in 1994, but we're used to them. It's possible. This is what most people answer about DDG. I think this is wrong. Google and Yahoo!, while funny names, sound "cool". DuckDuckGo doesn't. My memory isn't great, so I can't be sure I'm right about this, but I'm pretty sure that the first time I heard "Google" or "Yahoo!", I had…

"2. The domain name itself is a problem (long, annoying to type, etc.), and once they get ddg it will be better." Actually, you can already use www.ddg.gg, which redirect you to the HTTPS version of DDG.

I actually knew that, but ddg.gg seems to never stick in my memory.

Re: 4 Weeks with DuckDuckGo

#89

Post by tonfa » Sun, May 06, 2012, 9:56 AM UTC

antidoh wrote: post #72

One of my favorite things about DDG is the bang, and my absolute favorite bang (when I use one) is !g. Because the URL for the resulting page is just the search, without all the cruft. !g googol https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=googol direct via google: http://www.google.com/#hl=en&gs_nf=1&cp=6&gs_id=36&xhr=t&q=googol&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&oq=googol&aq=0&aqi=h1g-s1g2g-s1&aql=&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_p…

Just configure a keyword for your browser, you also get a clean url.

Re: 4 Weeks with DuckDuckGo

#90

Post by msfd » Sun, May 06, 2012, 10:00 AM UTC

SeanDav wrote: post #2

I find Googles' invasion of privacy a big turn off. I have long since stopped using Facebook for exactly this reason. I am not quite at the point with Google where I say I don't trust them, unlike Facebook. I regularly check out DuckDuckGo but its search results are not quite there yet for me, in comparison to Google. At this stage the gap is narrowing, both as a result of my increasing concerns over the invasion of…

Actually, if you like DuckDuckGo but sometimes want google search results, you can use Startpage, which provide the same results that google, but "privately" (like scroogle).

You just have to add the iBang !sp in DDG.