6 ms·
> It’s not an easy thing to do, mostly because old habits die hard, but it is actually very possible. That's a different premise than most people are using. I
by simonsarris 14y ago
> It’s not an easy thing to do, mostly because old habits die hard, but it is actually very possible.
That's a different premise than most people are using.
I wouldn't quit Google services because its possible. I would quit Google services if it was personally worth it.
And it simply isn't. Not for me and not for the overwhelming majority of internet users.
Oddly, he confuses why it might be worth it too. He says at the beginning that it is "mostly because old habits die hard", but ends with "people are willing to give up their privacy before handing over cash". Neither of these address the utility of being in the Google ecosystem, especially if you own several Android devices.
I think its good to talk about the practicalities of leaving Google, but I don't think this article does a very thorough job. It just takes jabs and offers a few poor alternatives.
~~~
The author mentions he uses iCloud instead of Gmail, but doesn't actually say why there would be any material difference between the two. I know that alternatives to Gmail exist, but I need to know why I'd want to change my email address for more than a lark.
~~~
The author claims DuckDuckGo is "fantastic", but gives zero reasons why except for different search results. I just tried it again, and got nothing useful for "showtimes near me", "movies near me", "NBA standings", "Cafes in Nashua", and a few recipes (for recipes Google shows reviews, total time and calories in-line). Try "flights from SFO" in each. Wow. Prices to popular destinations in-line in Google.
What different search results, make DuckDuckGo fantastic? Does anyone have any examples?
Here we are at long last in the age of the Semantic Web, 12 years after Berners-Lee declared it a thing (and 7 years since he lamented that his vision had gone unrealized). The combination of web semantics and very powerful inferences have made Google (and Bing) search into wonderful powerhouses of utility with so much information above the fold and even before the click! DuckDuckGo has nothing in this space.
One of the best tests for search engines in my opinion is what it does it poor or incomplete search terms. Often I don't know how to spell something, or someone has related something to me with incomplete information. What if someone told me to look up a cat breed called the "egyptian maw". DuckDuckGo returns nothing at all useful, Google correctly figures out that my friend spelled the breed wrong, its really "egyptian mau".
Interestingly, trying DuckDuckGo with capital letters ("Egyptian Maw", or merely capitalizing Egyptian) produces completely different results, in this case more correct ones. That certainly fits the "DuckDuckGo is different" mold, but in a way that's horrifying.
- EvanKelly 14y agoNot to nitpick, but I was surprised to see you got "nothing useful" for "NBA Standings". What do you consider useful? Is it not worth your time if the search engine doesn't provide the current standings on the page? My first result for "nba standings" was nba.com/standings which is probably the canonical source for such a thing.
- nilkn 14y agoTo be fair to DuckDuckGo, I tried your searches and did get useful results. "movies near me" took me to Yahoo! Movies, which showed me theaters near me. I could also search for something like "movies [zip code]". I tried it for a few different zip codes and it always got me the results I wanted, but not always through the same site. For one zip code, it brought up the Fandango page for that area, which had exactly what I wanted. For another, it took me right to the showtime page of the only theater in the town. As for "NBA standings," I'm not a huge NBA guy, so maybe I don't know what you wanted, but it takes me right to nba.com/standings, which is the same as the top result on Google. The only difference that I can tell is that Google puts some of the standings in a table on the search results page, which doesn't seem like a huge deal to me. It sounds like you're judging a search engine based solely on the information it takes out of links and puts in its own format on the results page, not by the links it provides. While I agree that bells and whistles like extracting certain results into a table on the results page are cool, that hardly seems to me like the ultimate test of a search engine. Actually I'd say that's one of the least important factors in a search engine, to me anyway. Anyway, with all that said, I don't have anything against Google. I just don't agree with your assessment of DuckDuckGo. Edit: That's not to say DuckDuckGo is perfect. I queried my own name and found that DuckDuckGo didn't pick up on all the stuff that Google does about me. For instance, I can't seem to find my linkedin page through DuckDuckGo at all. Still, honestly, I think it seems pretty decent for a search engine. Not better than Google, but certainly useful. Edit2: DuckDuckGo actually has some cool features that Google does not. Search "password generator" on DDG and it actually generates a password for you above the search results. Search "hackage reactive-banana" and it gives you a summary of the Haskell package above the search results.
- simonsarris 14y ago