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

The next version of DuckDuckGo

next.duckduckgo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 331 posts

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#81

Post by nickconfer »

yegg wrote: 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 :)

Hi Yegg. Very interesting update. Two suggestions for places..

1) If I search "self storage columbia mo" I get place results but if I "search self storage 65203" I do not get place results. I noticed this does work for food using a more familiar zipcode like 90210.. but maybe still a little zip code work to be done.

2) What about when I search "thai" or "self storage" in general. DuckDuckGo is known for not tracking the user, but if I search something that with location information would most likely provide place results, shouldn't I be given some type of indicator that with just a zipcode or city name I could be given better results? That way you are educating new users while still providing them the results they need and the privacy DuckDuckGo is known for.

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#82

Post by gabriel34 »

JunkDNA wrote: post #71
antris wrote: post #52

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

Please don't keep it to yourself! What is this privacy-protecting search engine that you've been using that is immune to US or other intelligence agencies' snooping?

If they snoop your logs, but you have no information on your users then they will get nothing. If they can snoop your traffic live than pretty much yes, anything US based is vulnerable, but at least my information is not being sold and traded between private companies.

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#83

Post by dpatrick86 »

Please continue working on the non-aesthetic fundamentals.

I reported this query previously to you guys, and it appears nothing has happened. It concerns me because it's so nonsensical it erodes my trust in your results, and it has persisted like this for over a year at this point....

If you search "IGF-1" on DDG you get maybe 100 results. Now lets try the same search on Google, but with a handicap. Let's be even more strict and only show results that contain this keyword specifically in the title using "intitle:igf-1". You'll find 69,500 results (at the time of this posting).

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#84

Post by dpatrick86 »

Please continue working on the non-aesthetic fundamentals.

I reported this query previously to you guys, and it appears nothing has happened. I'm sharing it here, because it concerns me: it's so nonsensical it erodes my trust in your results.

If you search "IGF-1" on DDG you get maybe 100 results. Now lets try the same search on Google, but with a handicap. Let's be even more strict and only show results that contain this keyword specifically in the title using "intitle:igf-1". You'll find 69,500 results (at the time of this posting).

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#85

Post by mfrommil »

Would be great if the settings menu expanded with hovering instead of a click (similar to the 3 buttons on the bottom). It's far enough to the side that accidental hovers could be avoided, while saving a click.

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#86

Post by olq »

I think it looks great! Tried it in my kind of night mode: dimmed display, very orange f.lux setting and inverted colours, and it works good. I like the design a lot! Why not widening the results column in larger windows and thus fit more results vertically? Maybe really large site logos/icons would be cool.

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#87

Post by ancarda »

gabriel34 wrote: post #66
ancarda wrote: 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?

I'm using Firefox. I see a lot of r.duckduckgo.com entries in my history.

Edit: I can't replicate in Chrome or Safari but if I change my user-agent in Safari, it begins hijacking my URLs. The JavaScript is obfuscated so it's hard to tell if it's actually checking for Firefox or not. The function it calls is DDG.get_http_redirect

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#88

Post by glennon »

aroman wrote: post #64
Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #44

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

Doctor_Fegg makes a good point. The OSM Legal FAQ states: "For a browsable electronic map (e.g. embedded in a web page or mobile phone application), the credit should appear in the corner of the map, as commonly seen with map APIs/libraries such as Google Maps." Link: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#3a._I_would_lik...

Re: The next version of DuckDuckGo

#90

Post by dredmorbius »

geuis wrote: post #74
fsck--off wrote: post #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, altho…

I'm having trouble parsing this part of your comment: "I dislike fixed headers for any interface that isn't for a phone or tablet because almost all laptop and desktop screens are widescreen." Are you saying that only fixed headers only work on mobile interfaces and they shouldn't be used on desktop? If so, I disagree with you. Fixed headers, if they are used at all, should only be used on desktop. There's simply not…

I agree with both you and GP.

Fixed headers should be banned on all devices.

They're a crutch, an annoyance, steal real estate, make me dislike your site, and frequently (if I cannot remove them by some means) will encourage me to use an alternate site.

For content-heavy sites, these and similar annoyances send me straight to Readability via bookmarklet or plugin.

Post reply on HN