3 ms·

There's a difference in our indifference, you know. "People don't really compare that hard" has been demonstrated to be false - if people didn't care that much

There's a difference in our indifference, you know. "People don't really compare that hard" has been demonstrated to be false - if people didn't care that much, Bing & co would've seen much greater success in the past few years. It's not like this hasn't been tried before. Google is so damn good at search that being "good enough" isn't good enough for the average user. You have to be as good as Google. This is why Apple and Mozilla work with Google to offer them as a default - they're not dumb, they know people expect it.

toyg 7y ago
Bing was really, really bad when it started. Perception was shaped and a lot of people go out of their way to avoid it, even though it's now just fine for most uses. In this sense, DDG has an advantage, because it has had time to improve substantially before its brand hit the mainstream (which has not happened yet). I'm still convinced the advantage Google has is not fundamentally technical. A lot of people expect it not because it's good, but because it has always meant "search" for them, ever since they got online. Google spent a generation at the top, and that sort of entrenchment is really hard to lose. Even Microsoft didn't really lose their primacy on the desktop - the internet just got big enough to escape their stranglehold.