4 ms·

Can't agree enough this. I'm pretty sure user interface research has shown that it's incredibly frustrating to users when you tell a computer to do one thing a

Can't agree enough this. I'm pretty sure user interface research has shown that it's incredibly frustrating to users when you tell a computer to do one thing and it does something else. The suggestions are helpful, but it should default to what I tell the fucking thing to search for!

JoshTriplett 15y ago
If the computer successfully guesses exactly the thing you wanted and does that instead of what you said, it can make you marginally more happy than a "did you mean", since it avoids the reaction of "well why didn't you just do it then?". However, if the computer guesses wrong, that will cause significantly more frustration to the user. This disproportionate amount of annoyance means that the computer must guess correctly far more often than it guesses wrong. Unfortunately, Google's current system frequently guesses wrong, and then compounds those incorrect guesses by using them by default, taunting the user with their original search.
- moultano 15y ago
  That's been our observation as well, and we've tried to constrain launches in exactly that way. Techniques that can fail in a way that disrespects the query have to have a much much higher win to loss ratio in order to launch. What I think we're understanding now is that something that fails 1% of the time, might not fail for just 1% of queries, it might fail for 1% of the users and work perfectly for the rest, and that small set can be really unhappy as a result. This is one small step in the direction of fixing that, but it's an issue we're paying close attention to, thanks in part to the feedback we've seen on HN. We very much want to avoid systematic failures like this, and if technical queries are a blind spot then please send them over whenever you see them. My email is in my profile and I'll make sure they get routed appropriately, and I tend to watch threads about Google trying to get good examples to debug.
  - TillE 15y ago
    I'm getting worse and worse results for all sorts of queries over the past few years, not just technical ones. I can't think of specific examples from the main search right now (I finally snapped and switched to DDG a few weeks ago), but here's a particularly terrible one from the Android Market: https://market.android.com/search?q=yore&so=1&c=apps https://market.android.com/search?q=yore&so=1&c=apps I appreciate that Google thinks I'm an illiterate chimp who doesn't know how to spell "your", but really truly, I was looking for a game with "yore" in the title. That's why I typed it. It's even an English word.
  - JoshTriplett 15y ago
    > What I think we're understanding now is that something that fails 1% of the time, might not fail for just 1% of queries, it might fail for 1% of the users and work perfectly for the rest, and that small set can be really unhappy as a result. Excellent insight. Linux kernel developers have had a similar experience with the use of the likely() and unlikely() hints on conditionals; it took a while to realize that unlikely() has to mean unlikely for any user, not just "unlikely for most users, and likely for the rest". So, for example, it doesn't make sense to write "if (unlikely(feature_disabled))", because anyone with the feature disabled will meet that condition every time. I've definitely had the experience that Google's automatic correction does the wrong thing for me more often than not; I almost always end up clicking the link to go to the search results I actually asked for.
    - moultano 15y ago
      Send over the examples when you come across them (or if you have it turned on, try www.google.com/searchhistory/ to find queries you've issued in the past.) I'll make sure they get to the right place.
eavc 15y ago
Actually, spelling might be the only exception to that rule. If you genuinely misspell a word, it's nice to have it fix it for you in one motion.
- waqf 15y ago
  Funny, for me spelling is least likely to be an exception to the rule. If I misspelled a word in my query then I meant it to be misspelled ... I was probably trying to track down a specific article in which I knew the word to be misspelled, or else I wanted to know how common the misspelling was. And my experience is that Google hates me a little more every year. Meanwhile, the synonym replacement is actually helpful sometimes. I wish I could turn off one without the other: that's why "verbatim mode" isn't going to do it for me.
edanm 15y ago
"I'm pretty sure user interface research has shown that it's incredibly frustrating to users when you tell a computer to do one thing and it does something else." You honestly believe that Google is doing something that is worse for the vast majority of their users? That makes the vast majority of their users more frustrated? And that they know this is true because research has proved it? Why would they act like that? Most of the people in this thread keep forgetting that they're not regular users. I'm willing to bet that the average Google user (90% of the population) often mistypes. I know I do, and I'm a pretty good speller and typist. You keep forgetting that most people can't type fast, can't spell that well, and you know what, a lot of the people typing on Google don't even know English all that well, either. For them, Google's spelling auto-correct is incredibly useful.
- daveungerer 15y ago
  You're putting words in my mouth. Please don't do that. I think it should be a given that it's frustrating when a computer doesn't do what you tell it. That doesn't mean that the cost of that frustration isn't offset by the added convenience for many users. In my case it isn't, and those (relatively frequent) times when it does frustrate me, I seriously consider switching search engines.
  - edanm 15y ago
    "You're putting words in my mouth. Please don't do that." You're right. I'm sorry. For the record, most of my comment was addressed to everyone in this thread, not just to you.

JoshTriplett 15y ago

If the computer successfully guesses exactly the thing you wanted and does that instead of what you said, it can make you marginally more happy than a "did you mean", since it avoids the reaction of "well why didn't you just do it then?". However, if the computer guesses wrong, that will cause significantly more frustration to the user. This disproportionate amount of annoyance means that the computer must guess correctly far more often than it guesses wrong. Unfortunately, Google's current system frequently guesses wrong, and then compounds those incorrect guesses by using them by default, taunting the user with their original search.

moultano 15y ago
That's been our observation as well, and we've tried to constrain launches in exactly that way. Techniques that can fail in a way that disrespects the query have to have a much much higher win to loss ratio in order to launch. What I think we're understanding now is that something that fails 1% of the time, might not fail for just 1% of queries, it might fail for 1% of the users and work perfectly for the rest, and that small set can be really unhappy as a result. This is one small step in the direction of fixing that, but it's an issue we're paying close attention to, thanks in part to the feedback we've seen on HN. We very much want to avoid systematic failures like this, and if technical queries are a blind spot then please send them over whenever you see them. My email is in my profile and I'll make sure they get routed appropriately, and I tend to watch threads about Google trying to get good examples to debug.
- TillE 15y ago
  I'm getting worse and worse results for all sorts of queries over the past few years, not just technical ones. I can't think of specific examples from the main search right now (I finally snapped and switched to DDG a few weeks ago), but here's a particularly terrible one from the Android Market: https://market.android.com/search?q=yore&so=1&c=apps https://market.android.com/search?q=yore&so=1&c=apps I appreciate that Google thinks I'm an illiterate chimp who doesn't know how to spell "your", but really truly, I was looking for a game with "yore" in the title. That's why I typed it. It's even an English word.
- JoshTriplett 15y ago
  > What I think we're understanding now is that something that fails 1% of the time, might not fail for just 1% of queries, it might fail for 1% of the users and work perfectly for the rest, and that small set can be really unhappy as a result. Excellent insight. Linux kernel developers have had a similar experience with the use of the likely() and unlikely() hints on conditionals; it took a while to realize that unlikely() has to mean unlikely for any user, not just "unlikely for most users, and likely for the rest". So, for example, it doesn't make sense to write "if (unlikely(feature_disabled))", because anyone with the feature disabled will meet that condition every time. I've definitely had the experience that Google's automatic correction does the wrong thing for me more often than not; I almost always end up clicking the link to go to the search results I actually asked for.
  - moultano 15y ago
    Send over the examples when you come across them (or if you have it turned on, try www.google.com/searchhistory/ to find queries you've issued in the past.) I'll make sure they get to the right place.

eavc 15y ago

Actually, spelling might be the only exception to that rule. If you genuinely misspell a word, it's nice to have it fix it for you in one motion.

waqf 15y ago
Funny, for me spelling is least likely to be an exception to the rule. If I misspelled a word in my query then I meant it to be misspelled ... I was probably trying to track down a specific article in which I knew the word to be misspelled, or else I wanted to know how common the misspelling was. And my experience is that Google hates me a little more every year. Meanwhile, the synonym replacement is actually helpful sometimes. I wish I could turn off one without the other: that's why "verbatim mode" isn't going to do it for me.

edanm 15y ago

"I'm pretty sure user interface research has shown that it's incredibly frustrating to users when you tell a computer to do one thing and it does something else." You honestly believe that Google is doing something that is worse for the vast majority of their users? That makes the vast majority of their users more frustrated? And that they know this is true because research has proved it? Why would they act like that? Most of the people in this thread keep forgetting that they're not regular users. I'm willing to bet that the average Google user (90% of the population) often mistypes. I know I do, and I'm a pretty good speller and typist. You keep forgetting that most people can't type fast, can't spell that well, and you know what, a lot of the people typing on Google don't even know English all that well, either. For them, Google's spelling auto-correct is incredibly useful.

daveungerer 15y ago
You're putting words in my mouth. Please don't do that. I think it should be a given that it's frustrating when a computer doesn't do what you tell it. That doesn't mean that the cost of that frustration isn't offset by the added convenience for many users. In my case it isn't, and those (relatively frequent) times when it does frustrate me, I seriously consider switching search engines.
- edanm 15y ago
  "You're putting words in my mouth. Please don't do that." You're right. I'm sorry. For the record, most of my comment was addressed to everyone in this thread, not just to you.