Why you don't like duckduckgo?

[Old Forum guest] anonymous
Created: 5 years and 22 days ago
Here's one blog entry about it:

I personally can say, that slowness annoys me badly. Another thing is poor results especially with queries which would require fresh and deep indexing of not so popular sites. This is something where Google really excels.

So what do you think about duckduckgo in general, and which are the worst things about this service?

This forum has been archived

Thank you all for the many comments, questions and suggestions. Particular thanks go to user x.15a2 for constantly monitoring, replying and helping so many users here. To continue these discussions, please head over to the DuckDuckGo subreddit.

We're actively working on speeding things up, which is generally much worse outside the US than inside.

As for poor results with fresh and deep indexing, these should be isolated cases. Do you have any specific examples?
posted by yegg Staff5 years and 22 days ago Link
Having done a search for Jerry Reed I'm surprised that a man, with the name of Jerry Reed on Facebook, is top of your listings. I think it's true to say that most people searching for Jerry Reed would be looking for the former guitarist, singer, songwriter and movie star. Also an excellent webpage called http://www.stanlaundon/reed.html doesn't seem appear to be listed at all!

However, I'm not giving up on DuckDuckGo. I'm still using it, from time to time, despite the slight issue I had getting it installed on a Mac.

Keep up the good work - I am sure I can be persuaded to be with you 100%.
posted by [Old Forum guest] • 5 years and 22 days ago Link
The 0-click I see is for Jerry Reed the musician.
posted by crazedpsyc 5 years and 22 days ago Link
I actually really like duckduckgo. That's the sad part. My heart says yes but my mind says "they'll get bought up by another company in a few months and all the enjoyment you got from it will be gone"

That's the thing keeping me with Google (besides Google Docs). Google is not disappearing any time soon. How do we get a commitment from DDG that they're here to stay?

The other issue is one of investment. I've already spent a long time with Google (Docs, Gmail, etc.). There needs to be a quick and easy way to integrate everything else into my DDG account so that everything but the search is powered by Google.
posted by [Old Forum rocky1138] • 5 years and 22 days ago Link
Well we've been around for over four years already!
posted by yegg Staff5 years and 22 days ago Link
Even if they get bought (which there is not a single sign of anyway), it doesn't mean they'll disappear. I wouldn't have a problem with DDG being bought, as long as the focus on privacy remains and that the company buying isn't G**gle or equivalent.
Of course, I don't use GDocs nor Gmail anymore... I moved back to local copies with auto-backup/sync - long story short, I reclaimed ownership of my data.
posted by [Old Forum patheticcockroach] • 4 years and 9 months ago Link
The uncertainty is not how long it's been here, it's how long it will be here.
posted by [Old Forum rocky1138] • 5 years and 22 days ago Link
Been using DDG for quite some time now (2 years or something) and i've never noticed any performance issues. Sure, it might be slower than google, but it has to be below the 1 sec difference mark, and I dont really pay attention to such things. In my opinion both google and DDG respond quick enough to feel responsive. The only thing that is kind of noticable when it comes to speed is DDGs "redirect" (if enabled), but thats a feature, right? ;]

In terms of features, DDG beats google anytime for me. google has this "search as you type"-thingy, sure, but it ended up annoying me more often than it helped. DDGs search results are very reliable (can tell someone to search for a term and "3rd or 4th link is what will help you" - try the same with google), the !bangs save a huge ammount of time and effort setting up keywords/shortcuts for different search types and the customization options can be very helpful to adjust it to your liking or workflow. There are these very seldom times when I feel like google returns more results (mostly when looking up some random error messages coming from some rare soft/hardware), but thats what !g/!b and "Try google/bing"-links are for. Other than that, I like the approach, the attitude and the changes very much so far. And if that didnt help - I'm a perl programmer myself. Not supporting a project written in perl would be like rooting for the enemy team when you home team plays against them in finals ;]


Regarding the uncertainty about DDG staying here.. Who can prevent DDG from being sold or slowly dying off like a few others did? Well, I believe I can. And so can you. As any technology, any product, any solution, search engines only "live" and "exist" as long as people use them. You manage to build up a solid "customer base" and keep them happy and content = you survive against the competition. And I think DDG is on the best way to accomplishing that. And as far as being "taken over/bought out" goes.. Sure, there is no guarantee that some day someone with a big pile of cash wont make that very tempting offer that the guys behind DDG wont be able to refuse, but so far it hasnt happened. And once again WE (the users) can help. How? Use the darn thing. Dont turn off the ads (and dont have ad-blockers on for DDG itself) and/or use Flattr. As long as the people paying the costs for all the background stuff (hosting/traffic/time invetment) can do that without having to spend their own cash, DDG will most likely stay the way it is.
Not using DDG simply because you're "affraid that it might be gone one day" is like throwing your laptop out of the window today, because it will be just an ugly paperweight in 2 years.

I'm not quite sure why you cant use GMail + GDocs AND DDG at the same time. Either your workflow is totally different from mine or I'm missing something. But I always saw all of those as separate websites, which are in separate tabs and which can be simply switched beween as required.
posted by [Old Forum guest] • 5 years and 21 days ago Link
Screenshot from SSL Labs

That's why.  Please fix this.  From reading the discussions here this is not a new issue.
posted by [Old Forum guest] • 5 years and 21 days ago Link
thanks for your concern; we actually have been playing around with this internally and are making sure we won't have to sacrifice speed.  something like the following should be deployed soon:

posted by caine Staff5 years and 21 days ago Link
Out of curiosity, how soon is "soon".

And for the record, I definitely appreciate DDG more than Google.
posted by [Old Forum bee.keeper] • 5 years and 20 days ago Link
This is rolling out right now.  Please please please let us know your feedback regarding speed.



posted by caine Staff5 years and 20 days ago Link
For me everything is fine. I didn't realise that it was updated and that the speed might be lower. If there is a speed difference it is not noticeable to me. So, I am still happy.
Keep up the good work.
posted by [Old Forum bee.keeper] • 5 years and 19 days ago Link
It´s has good speed but it is poor in results

Keep the good work!

posted by [Old Forum guest] • 5 years and 10 days ago Link
I don't like not being able to block search results. ChaCha is killing me.
posted by [Old Forum guest] • 5 years and 9 days ago Link
Add -site:chacha.com to your query. Or did you mean something more permanent? A setting to exclude domains from your results?
posted by crazedpsyc 5 years and 8 days ago Link
specific domain blocking is coming to settings shortly - and you can save them with the anonymous cloud save method.
posted by caine Staff5 years and 7 days ago Link
posted by [Old Forum guest] • 5 years and 7 days ago Link
The bang syntax annoys me greatly.
  1. Typing the exclaimation point is cumbersome. I'd rather use something that only requires a single keypress such as a backslash (\) or grave (`).
  2. I have to type a space before the exclaimation point when it's at the end of the search string. I'd much rather type "cats!gi" than "cats !gi" if the bang syntax is at the end. It's a small thing, but it would save me typing and aggravation. That, and it bites me every single time when I'm searching.

I also wish !cpan would search CPAN, not MetaCPAN. Use !mcpan or something for those who want to use the latter. I prefer the former.

posted by [Old Forum guest] • 5 years and 6 days ago Link
You can always use !oldcpan. The decision to define MetaCPAN as the "current CPAN browser" is made by the Perl community and not by DuckDuckGo.
posted by getty 5 years and 6 days ago Link
I'm new here. I'll see if I like or not later on.
posted by [Old Forum coronaadvances.com] • 5 years and 3 days ago Link
Replying to the SSL test of Guest, if you go back and check it now. DDG is rated A(88) now,
posted by [Old Forum ndowens] • 4 years and 9 months ago Link
I was always concerned about Google's privacy. There were rumors saying that Google reads your GMAIL emails, and they read it and make ads related to your email's topic. And apparently that was the same for your searches. Also, i've been sick of Google Instant.( You know;the type and search thing that works at the same time.)Therefore after i've been on a quest to search for better and more reliable search engines.
I've found DuckDuckGo. It apparently was rated better than blekko, Google, Yahoo, Bing( Sometimes ), LinkedIn, DogPile, and many more top search engines. Now that i've tried it, i loved it. The only thing i'm concerned about is it cannot hold it's title and claim and let some other search engine pull it down or get sold to some other big company.
Anyhow, i love DuckDuckGo. But i have one question: What is DuckDuckGo 0-click?
posted by [Old Forum cpfeast] • 4 years and 9 months ago Link
Zero-click info is the information that appears above any organic links or the sponsored link, giving you instant-answers to many types of queries. 

Some great examples: 

If you have any ideas for instant-answer plugins, you can suggest them here: http://ideas.duckduckhack.com/
posted by zac Staff4 years and 9 months ago Link
The worst thing is that duckduckgo is fairly stupid by google standards. Its not a show stopper, I'd rather use ddg and not have all the attempted snooping. But anyway.
Lets suppose I want to search for the attractive beach volley ball player for GBR. Who wouldn't?
But I'm watching TV and only hear her name. Zara Dampknee. Now her name is spelt Dampney.
Google is all over it.
DDG only got there because some other idiot also thought it was spelt Dampknee. It was the only suggestion.
This happens a lot. The 'Did you mean " "' for DDG is rubbish. It has no empathy for phonetics and struggles to put the pieces together when spelling is wrong.
My example wasn't great, but often a bad spelling will get you no returns at all. Google will usually nail your intention. Its just smarter.
posted by [Old Forum guest] • 4 years and 9 months ago Link
I'm confused here.  You'd like us to do query alterations?  The did you mean is there to allow you to get results on what you actually searched for.  We could easily re-query with the suggestion and make it transparent like Google does but specifically don't at this point.
posted by caine Staff4 years and 9 months ago Link
I'd agree with cainetighe here. On your example at least, DDG does get the proper suggestion, but doesn't enforce it upon us because unlike Google it assumes that the user knows what he's looking for. Sometimes I search for rare words looking similar to other common words, and Google is a major PITA on those because it always assumes I'm looking for the common one and redirects me to it without asking first.
posted by [Old Forum patheticcockroach] • 4 years and 9 months ago Link
That's a really good point. 
So how can DDG strike a compromise between two intentions (1. either the person knows EXACTLY what he/she is looking for, or 2. the person has a fuzzy idea of what he/she is looking for, and would like to be guided in some sort of direction, like with the Dampnkee example)? Or perhaps not try to account for this problem at all?  #2 bugs me a bit though, it implies that DDG should impose some sort of opinion/direction on the user. For me at least, this is why I use DDG for some things, and Google for others. 
posted by [Old Forum action-potato] • 4 years and 9 months ago Link
Now that I think of it, a trivial way to "fix" this would be to create a setting "automatically enforce the best-guess correction on me yes/no". So people who know what they type could set it to no, and the others could set it to yes. I don't mind (too much) it to be on by default if required to be noob-friendly.
posted by [Old Forum patheticcockroach] • 4 years and 9 months ago Link
I think what Guest means is that Google is smart enough to know what you're trying to search for, given a non-exact/mispelled query. 
The key thing Guest mentioned is phonetics. I do this too; I hear something on television, attempt to spell it by purely using my ears. Oftentimes we get the spelling wrong. But Google knows what you're trying to say -- (hey! Dampknee SOUNDS like Dampney! Did you mean Dampney?) DDG often slips up in this respect.
posted by [Old Forum action-potato] • 4 years and 9 months ago Link