4 ms·

I don't get the HN hate of Google as a search tool. Yes, SEO has made searching more difficult, but Google is still by far the best search engine provided that

I don't get the HN hate of Google as a search tool. Yes, SEO has made searching more difficult, but Google is still by far the best search engine provided that your searches are focused and you use search tools (e.g., excluding terms, focusing on certain sites, etc.). I've tried other search engines (e.g., DDG, Bing) and they just aren't as good as Google.

tester756 4y ago
>your searches are focused are what? >I don't get the HN hate of Google as a search tool. Yes, SEO has made searching more difficult, but Google is still by far the best search engine provided that your searches are focused and you use search tools (e.g., excluding terms, focusing on certain sites, etc.). I've tried other search engines (e.g., DDG, Bing) and they just aren't as good as Google. What if their search is better just because way, way way more people use it?
- emodendroket 4y ago
  What if indeed? What does that imply to you? I don’t really care why it is so much better so long as it is.
OJFord 4y ago
I've used DDG exclusively for about 10 years, it's good enough that I don't realise I'm missing out.
ranting-moth 4y ago
Many of the HN crowd remember when Google came into existence and how wonderful it was. If it existed on the internet, Google would find it for you and it was usually the top resault. It was amazing. Today, it's a shadow of its former self. You regularly have to search, wade through the ads that are written like informative articles, adjust your query slightly and repeat the process. It's rubbish.
- jeffbee 4y ago
  What these people are remembering is when the web was small and dorks-only. Now it is huge and full of normies of all kinds, including every shade of commercialism and fraud.
  - pirate787 4y ago
    Incorrect, the web was mainstream by 1996, two years before Google even launched.
    - jeffbee 4y ago
      The number of internet users is currently 150x more than it was in 1996. I don't think you can make an argument that it was already mainstream in '96 with a few tens of millions of people on it. The web was overwhelmingly informational up to an inflection point where it became overwhelmingly commercial. That's the thing people are upset about.
      - JohnFen 4y ago
        This is absolutely right. The web died about then, really. What we have now is shameful and embarrassing, and society is poorer for it. And it's not Google's fault. But it also remains true that Google's search just doesn't work well for many people, and that some alternatives work better for them.
    - xyzelement 4y ago
      In 1996, did every traffic attorney publish a thought piece on why you should fight your summons in X county? No, back then if you searched a topic you were MUCH more likely to find self hosted content from someone who nerded out on an issue and is sharing their insight, not publishing boilerplate because they feel they need to.
  - ranting-moth 4y ago
    Yes, but other search engines existed before Google. They weren't very useful or pleasant to use. Google solved a big problem and then went to sleep while counting their money. They even started to be evil. Now the original problem has evolved but Google hasn't managed to keep up.
JohnFen 4y ago
> you use search tools (e.g., excluding terms, focusing on certain sites, etc.). Focusing on certain sites? If you know what site you want, why not just go there? You don't need Google for that. I've had very limited success with their search modifiers. The main one I want to work is the literal search by putting things in quotes. But I don't think that has ever actually worked for me. If they brought back the + modifier and it worked, that would also go far.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
bitcurious 4y ago
Remember when image search didn’t give up after ~100 images? Google has definitely gotten worse, and it’s obviously margins-motivated.

tester756 4y ago

>your searches are focused are what? >I don't get the HN hate of Google as a search tool. Yes, SEO has made searching more difficult, but Google is still by far the best search engine provided that your searches are focused and you use search tools (e.g., excluding terms, focusing on certain sites, etc.). I've tried other search engines (e.g., DDG, Bing) and they just aren't as good as Google. What if their search is better just because way, way way more people use it?

emodendroket 4y ago
What if indeed? What does that imply to you? I don’t really care why it is so much better so long as it is.

OJFord 4y ago

I've used DDG exclusively for about 10 years, it's good enough that I don't realise I'm missing out.

ranting-moth 4y ago

Many of the HN crowd remember when Google came into existence and how wonderful it was. If it existed on the internet, Google would find it for you and it was usually the top resault. It was amazing. Today, it's a shadow of its former self. You regularly have to search, wade through the ads that are written like informative articles, adjust your query slightly and repeat the process. It's rubbish.

jeffbee 4y ago
What these people are remembering is when the web was small and dorks-only. Now it is huge and full of normies of all kinds, including every shade of commercialism and fraud.
- pirate787 4y ago
  Incorrect, the web was mainstream by 1996, two years before Google even launched.
  - jeffbee 4y ago
    The number of internet users is currently 150x more than it was in 1996. I don't think you can make an argument that it was already mainstream in '96 with a few tens of millions of people on it. The web was overwhelmingly informational up to an inflection point where it became overwhelmingly commercial. That's the thing people are upset about.
    - JohnFen 4y ago
      This is absolutely right. The web died about then, really. What we have now is shameful and embarrassing, and society is poorer for it. And it's not Google's fault. But it also remains true that Google's search just doesn't work well for many people, and that some alternatives work better for them.
  - xyzelement 4y ago
    In 1996, did every traffic attorney publish a thought piece on why you should fight your summons in X county? No, back then if you searched a topic you were MUCH more likely to find self hosted content from someone who nerded out on an issue and is sharing their insight, not publishing boilerplate because they feel they need to.
- ranting-moth 4y ago
  Yes, but other search engines existed before Google. They weren't very useful or pleasant to use. Google solved a big problem and then went to sleep while counting their money. They even started to be evil. Now the original problem has evolved but Google hasn't managed to keep up.

JohnFen 4y ago

> you use search tools (e.g., excluding terms, focusing on certain sites, etc.). Focusing on certain sites? If you know what site you want, why not just go there? You don't need Google for that. I've had very limited success with their search modifiers. The main one I want to work is the literal search by putting things in quotes. But I don't think that has ever actually worked for me. If they brought back the + modifier and it worked, that would also go far.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

bitcurious 4y ago

Remember when image search didn’t give up after ~100 images? Google has definitely gotten worse, and it’s obviously margins-motivated.