2 ms·
I have to disagree fundamentally with the author on this point: > but then Google was always ugly until relatively recently Google was originally and for many
by ogre_codes 7y ago
I have to disagree fundamentally with the author on this point:
> but then Google was always ugly until relatively recently
Google was originally and for many years extremely elegant in it’s simplicity. There is nothing ugly about getting people exactly what they need instantly.
As for the main thrust of the article, I’ve already found Google’s results mostly untrustworthy. For some time search results have been so dominated by adverts that frequently the results I was looking for are buried under the fold. Search is a simple task and for 99% of searches there are at least 2 competitors who serve 90% fewer adverts per page. For the other 1% of searches I’m 3 keystrokes away from getting Google’s search laden results as a second opinion.
- monadic2 7y ago> Google was originally and for many years extremely elegant in it’s simplicity. What, no ads?
- caymanjim 7y agoGoogle has always and still does have the least-obtrusive ads. I don't like when ads masquerade as content, but if I have to receive ads, I'd prefer Google-managed ads over anyone else's. Even Stack Overflow fills their pages with hideous animated ads, and they're about the second-least-objectionable ad-bearing site.
- Cyclone_ 7y agoAgree 100% about the least obtrusive ads. The ads on the verge jump out at you and are pretty in your face.
- ogre_codes 7y ago> Google has always and still does have the least-obtrusive ads. This is no longer true. DuckDuckGo definitely has less obtrusive advertising now versus Google. There are fewer adverts per search and adverts are better labeled. Ads have gotten so pervasive, on a typical Google search, organic results are frequently below the fold.
- ogre_codes 7y agoCuriously, this post made me do a quick search and I was surprised at how poorly Bing faired versus Google and DDG.
- monadic2 7y agoThe issue with ads is not their obtrusiveness....
- dreamcompiler 7y agoGoogle had zero ads in the early days.
- ogre_codes 7y agoOriginally no. Then the first rev with ads had ads that were unobtrusive, obviously adverts, and often relevant.
- StanislavPetrov 7y ago>Google was originally and for many years extremely elegant in it’s simplicity. The reason I started using Google (and made it my home page) over 20 years ago wasn't because of the quality of their searches, but because their home page was a plain white page that loaded instantly (in contrast to Alta Vista and other search engines that were loaded down with all sorts of animations and advertisements that took forever to load). Even after I got broadband I stuck with Google for many years because their searches were clearly the best. In the last few years (especially the last year), their search quality has fallen off a cliff and there is just no compelling reason to stick with them.
- erikpukinskis 7y agoYeah, it’s as if they don’t understand modernism: it’s about deep understanding of your materials, and letting the forms be driven by the demands of those materials. A truly modern web site feels unmistakably “webby”. Anything with a petina of beauty is more Romantic than Modern.