3 ms·
From the README, > What is the difference between searx and SearxNG? > TL;DR: SearXNG is for users that want more features and bugs getting fixed quicker. If
by rovr138 3y ago
From the README,
> What is the difference between searx and SearxNG?
> TL;DR: SearXNG is for users that want more features and bugs getting fixed quicker. If you prefer a minimalist software and stable experience, use searx.
> SearxNG is a fork of searx, created by a former maintainer of searx. The fork was created because the majority of the maintainers at the time did not find the new proposed features privacy respecting enough. The most significant issue is with engine metrics.
> Searx is built for privacy conscious users. It comes with a unique set of challenges. One of the problems we face is that users rather not report bugs, because they do not want to publicly share what engines they use or what search query triggered a problem. It is a challenge we accepted.
> The new metrics feature collects more information to make engine maintenance easier. We could have had better and more error reports to benefit searx maintainers. However, we believe that the users of searx must come first, not the software. We are willing to compromise on the lack of issue reports to avoid violating the privacy of users.
> Furthermore, SearxNG is under heavy refactoring and dependencies are constantly updated, even if it is unnecessary. It increases the risk of introducing regressions. In searx we strive for stability, rather than moving fast and breaking things.
https://github.com/searxng/searxng https://github.com/searxng/searxng
- ozarker 3y agoI’ve been using searxng for a while. It works very well in my experience
- rovr138 3y agoSame here. Happy to see there's at least a shoutout on the home with it being marked as not longer maintained.
- i_read_news 3y agoFrom my understanding, the metrics from SearxNG are still privacy respecting, and searx never clearly defined what constitutes privacy enforcement or drew a clear line. Most active developers went to SearxNG for that reason, and searx was largely in maintenance mode for a long time. I had recently asked to clear the confusion, and honestly just made me think searx was passively abandoned already - they just made it official.
- johnklos 3y agoFrom my reading of things, they (SearX) wanted to protect us (the people who use SearX) from ourselves (the people who run SearX). In other words, marketing BS. If I don't want aggregate stats, I won't collect them. I'm a big person now and can decide that for myself, thanks.
- unixfox 3y agoMaybe I'm biased because I'm a SearXNG maintainer, but I don't fully agree with the comparison done by SearX team. Not reporting the problems in the engines do not benefit to the users, if nothing works why use SearX in the first place then? I would even say it's a major advantage to have the ability to quickly and easily report the issue, this way the users are all getting quick fixes as soon as something break. We rely on unstable API or ways to extract the results from the engines, it doesn't make any sense to not have a system that allow to report the instabilities. It is true that SearXNG code base change a lot faster than SearX one when it was still actively maintained, but that's because our users want to see the software evolve to new needs, and like I said above relying on unstable ways to extract the data require us to improve the software so that it still works with the engines we rely on. A major feature we added is the new anti bot available on the public instances, it allows having public instances that work with almost all the engines instead of getting errors all over the place because bots were abusing the instance.