6 ms·
DuckDuckGo featured on Lifehacker
- ErrantX 16y agoNo mention of the privacy aspect though! Shame I wonder if that is interesting - or simply an oversight. EDIT: they've edited it in since I read the story... (just checked the original tab I opened)
- pmjordan 16y agoFTA: "It aims to be a Google competitor, providing a host of additional features the search engine giant is missing, like [...] keeping your searches anonymous."
- ErrantX 16y agoHmm, I could have sworn that wasn't there when I opened it (I did check because I was surprised not to see any mention)
- pclark 16y agoProbably because common users aren't that interested in search privacy.
- ComputerGuru 16y agoDuckDuckGo just needs a better logo and a better name and it'd be major league. They've got the difficult part down, but there's no way any real company or serious non-hacker will take them seriously the way they are now. I want a search engine whose design, name, logo, and style inspire me with confidence and reassurance. I want to see power, I want to see professionalism. I don't want to play games with a duck that lucks like it was drawn by an amateur. I think spending a mere 1k on design and branding will have an incredible impact on DDD now that it's really beginning to get off the ground and catch the eye of people outside the HN/Reddit communities.
- pmjordan 16y agoI don't know. Initially, Google was far more playful than any of the other search engines of the time. Also "professional" design & branding deteriorates into "boring" far too easily. And boring is unlikely to be noticed. People are likely to remember the duck. If you google for 'duck search', DDG is the first result. Just providing a counterpoint BTW. You may well be right.
- jacquesm 16y agoLet me repeat that separately just so it stands out, it makes the point more eloquently than this whole thread: > If you google for 'duck search', DDG is the first result.
- baddox 16y agoGoogle is still playful. Their name still is a joke, even if it has become borderline genericized. Also, remember the Pacman ordeal just the other day? Not to mention the numerous Easter eggs for terms like "recursion."
- pmjordan 16y agoYes, Google haven't changed, and I was careful to avoid wording it like that. But Bing tries to emulate the playfulness, for example. In the early days Google stood out much more.
- grendel 16y agoI think I heard these same arguments against google... DuckDuckGo is in good company.
- ugh 16y agoReally? I think DuckDuckGo’s brand is incredibly strong, I loved it the first time I saw it. You better stick out and be memorable if you have the balls to enter the search market. I don’t think looking professional (whatever that means) would help. (The companies with great products on the web – YouTube, Twitter, Google, flickr, Dropbox and so on – in general all don’t have the kinds of professional logos pre-web companies – Mercedes, IBM, Microsoft, Apple and so on – have. Maybe that’s why professional-looking logos don’t manage to inspire much confidence in me on the web.)
- MikeCapone 16y agoCongrats Gabriel! Glad to see your efforts paying of (at least in mindshare) lately. Keep adding good features (and taking away bad ones) and listening to your users and you should be golden. I personally tend to agree with those that say that the name/logo is holding you back (I have a sense of humor and don't take it too seriously, but a lot of people are probably scared off), but it's your thing and you should take it into the direction that you feel will work best.
- apphacker 16y agoThe new category thing is annoying, if I search for 'django' I don't even get a list of links (the top one should be the python django framework) I get a list of things named django. I have to scroll all the way to the bottom of a bunch of junk to get the django web framework link. Maybe make that category thing less aggressive or something one can turn off in the settings.
- epi0Bauqu 16y agoThx--I'm working on a setting to disable disambiguation, but I think you're missing the point. Those are the search results. The idea is you click on the one that is most relevant and then get "deep" results tailored to that particular meaning. The stuff at the bottom is meant only to serve you if none of the meanings are what you were looking for.
- schwanksta 16y agoJust wondering, have you tried getting ddg.com? My only real gripe is I find typing duckduckgo.com to be cumbersome for some reason, even though it's only 4 characters more than 'google'. It just doesn't seem to flow.
- rtp 16y agoThere's http://www.dukgo.com http://www.dukgo.com, which is a tad bit less work to type ;-)
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- ronnier 16y agoI really enjoy watching the progression of DDG and the traction it's gaining. I admire Gabriel Weinberg for working so hard towards it.
- balakk 16y agoThe only thing I'm annoyed about DDG is its over-reliance on Javascript. Now I'm no luddite; i enjoy the flexibility and power javascript brings. However I think the first page of results should come with the page response. For people like me with crappy bandwidth, there is a noticeable lag before the first 10 results appear. I'm reasonably happy with the content though; it does an acceptable job of replacing google.
- hswolff 16y agoDDG's founder has officially won me over. On my little blog I keep (harrywolff.com) I made a post about Duck Duck Go and Gabe managed to find me and my post. Thank you Gabe. Keep up the very awesome work.
- blub 16y agoPlease make a mobile version. With Opera mini the search box is larger than the screen and half of it is shown out of the screen when the page loads.