3 ms·

https://www.google.com/advanced_search https://www.google.com/advanced_search This?

BiteCode_dev 4y ago
Yes, and very few people use that because most users can't tell an app from a website, spell URL correctly or tell you what "" does in google. When I need those features I use the operators directly in the search field anyway. The single omniscient search field is an amazing interface, it's incredible at what it does, which is understanding what our idiodic human brain is attempting to express with sausage fingers a monday morning.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  > spell URL correctly That's impossiboe by design. There are different cuaracters that look identical, foreign alphabets and special characters. Then there are GUids and queries in url
manimino 4y ago
Oof. That's really complicated and still doesn't do the trick. Concrete example -- when searching Reddit, I can check a box to confine the search to the current subreddit I'm on. That does a wonderful job of restricting results, and... it's one checkbox. You don't need to make search feel like filing your taxes to make it better.
- eganist 4y ago
  > Oof. That's really complicated and still doesn't do the trick. > Concrete example -- when searching Reddit, I can check a box to confine the search to the current subreddit I'm on. That does a wonderful job of restricting results, and... it's one checkbox. > You don't need to make search feel like filing your taxes to make it better. I'm surprised at the Reddit example since Reddit's search capabilities are in-fact so awful that people have actually quit the platform for it or have at the very least resorted to using Google to search for specific Reddit threads (doable via Google's advanced search or simply adding the keyword "site:reddit.com"). In fact, the capability you described is present on the Advanced Search form. Look for the row "site or domain" and you can constrain your search to just specific sites. I think the thing people miss is that Google effectively creates the function you're describing not just by having a multi-field search box (advanced search) but by allowing that to be achieved through just one text box (e.g "site:", "inurl:", "filetype:", and other key words), and for more tailored searches, Google provides entirely distinct UIs such as News, Shopping, Scholar (my favorite), etc. I suppose I'm just lost as to what the main complaint is. I can't bring myself to work at Google because of how heavily they rely on adtech for revenue, but I can't hate their search.
elliekelly 4y ago
That just creates the search with boolean operators for you... which Google then ignores. Attempts to search for an “exact string” are merely a suggestion to Google. They’d rather return 10 pages of definitely not what I wanted (i.e., wrong!) results than only return one or two hits even if those one or two hits are exactly what I’m searching for!
- eganist 4y ago
  Nah, you can still force it. It treats exact-strings as suggestions at first, but you can still power through. e.g https://www.google.com/search?q="search+enqine" https://www.google.com/search?q="search+enqine" click the link that says "Search instead for 'search enqine'"
  - tremon 4y ago
    So Google understood my search query perfectly fine, but still chose to ignore what I asked for, and then makes me jump through additional hoops to get my initial question answered?
    - eganist 4y ago
      > So Google understood my search query perfectly fine, but still chose to ignore what I asked for, and then makes me jump through additional hoops to get my initial question answered? Google's catering to the common audience, so yes basically. The hoops are for people who know what they're doing, which is annoying but understandable.
      - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
        is there any proof that this has improved search for most people? Everyone i kniw says the opposite
        kyleee 4y ago
        improving search is not the main goal, rather it's keeping an interface that can still plausibly be described as "search" while allowing for the most ad impressions and clicks

Yes, and very few people use that because most users can't tell an app from a website, spell URL correctly or tell you what "" does in google. When I need those features I use the operators directly in the search field anyway. The single omniscient search field is an amazing interface, it's incredible at what it does, which is understanding what our idiodic human brain is attempting to express with sausage fingers a monday morning.

ClumsyPilot 4y ago
> spell URL correctly That's impossiboe by design. There are different cuaracters that look identical, foreign alphabets and special characters. Then there are GUids and queries in url

manimino 4y ago

Oof. That's really complicated and still doesn't do the trick. Concrete example -- when searching Reddit, I can check a box to confine the search to the current subreddit I'm on. That does a wonderful job of restricting results, and... it's one checkbox. You don't need to make search feel like filing your taxes to make it better.

eganist 4y ago
> Oof. That's really complicated and still doesn't do the trick. > Concrete example -- when searching Reddit, I can check a box to confine the search to the current subreddit I'm on. That does a wonderful job of restricting results, and... it's one checkbox. > You don't need to make search feel like filing your taxes to make it better. I'm surprised at the Reddit example since Reddit's search capabilities are in-fact so awful that people have actually quit the platform for it or have at the very least resorted to using Google to search for specific Reddit threads (doable via Google's advanced search or simply adding the keyword "site:reddit.com"). In fact, the capability you described is present on the Advanced Search form. Look for the row "site or domain" and you can constrain your search to just specific sites. I think the thing people miss is that Google effectively creates the function you're describing not just by having a multi-field search box (advanced search) but by allowing that to be achieved through just one text box (e.g "site:", "inurl:", "filetype:", and other key words), and for more tailored searches, Google provides entirely distinct UIs such as News, Shopping, Scholar (my favorite), etc. I suppose I'm just lost as to what the main complaint is. I can't bring myself to work at Google because of how heavily they rely on adtech for revenue, but I can't hate their search.

elliekelly 4y ago

That just creates the search with boolean operators for you... which Google then ignores. Attempts to search for an “exact string” are merely a suggestion to Google. They’d rather return 10 pages of definitely not what I wanted (i.e., wrong!) results than only return one or two hits even if those one or two hits are exactly what I’m searching for!

eganist 4y ago
Nah, you can still force it. It treats exact-strings as suggestions at first, but you can still power through. e.g https://www.google.com/search?q="search+enqine" https://www.google.com/search?q="search+enqine" click the link that says "Search instead for 'search enqine'"
- tremon 4y ago
  So Google understood my search query perfectly fine, but still chose to ignore what I asked for, and then makes me jump through additional hoops to get my initial question answered?
  - eganist 4y ago
    > So Google understood my search query perfectly fine, but still chose to ignore what I asked for, and then makes me jump through additional hoops to get my initial question answered? Google's catering to the common audience, so yes basically. The hoops are for people who know what they're doing, which is annoying but understandable.
    - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
      is there any proof that this has improved search for most people? Everyone i kniw says the opposite
      - kyleee 4y ago
        improving search is not the main goal, rather it's keeping an interface that can still plausibly be described as "search" while allowing for the most ad impressions and clicks