5 ms·
Have you used it lately? It’s on par or better for 99% of what I use it for (tech, real estate, and advocacy).
by gogopuppygogo 6y ago
Have you used it lately?
It’s on par or better for 99% of what I use it for (tech, real estate, and advocacy).
- tptacek 6y agoI have. Also, I just checked my browser history of searches against DDG. I stand by what I said. What they're doing is impressive, but that's not the same thing as saying that they're on the same level of result quality as Google.
- kevin_thibedeau 6y agoI have to use !g a lot because of inferior results from the default search. It can be tough to even get a relevant wikipedia entry to show up in the top 5.
- depressedpanda 6y agoNot really. I usually just add 'wiki' to my query. Or use !w.
- bleepblorp 6y agoI use DDG daily. It's fine for simple, popular, searches (e.g. finding the website of a company by name) but is completely useless for anything even remotely complicated or specialized. DDG won't even return Stack ("Your question has been deleted as a duplicate") Overflow results for technical questions.
- greenyoda 6y agoWe must be asking very different technical questions, since I get lots of Stack Overflow results on DDG.
- leokennis 6y agoI disagree. Google has one strong point, which is "context search". For example, "song with the trumpet intro 90s" or something, will yield crap on DDG and a YouTube link to the song you had in your head on Google. For any other search term, Google generally spams me with "answer boxes" that are universally slightly besides the point, while DDG gives me a clean page of relevant links.