4 ms·

As nice as the privacy aspect of DDG is, I cannot see it sustaining the traffic over a long period. The main issue here is Google did a lot of vertical integrat

by yalogin 13y ago

As nice as the privacy aspect of DDG is, I cannot see it sustaining the traffic over a long period. The main issue here is Google did a lot of vertical integration which DDG did not do yet. The biggest feature lacking is directions. Searching for an address on Google automatically shows it on a map and you can immediately go to the map and get directions. The number of searches just to get information (like code search etc) should be less compared to searching for services and directions. They need to build these features in to sustain the interest and to get more regular users.

imperialWicket 13y ago
Searching for an address on ddg shows a map, it's just not a google map. It also has links to investigate the address at Bing, Google, and MapQuest. Also, you can use !gm ADDRESS directly, and it passes your data to google over ssl via DDG's server. I think a big issue for DDG is this type of exclusivity complaint. And while it's a valid concern for some use cases, I really don't see DDG telling you to stop using other search services - they actively promote it. I use DDG all the time, but I don't think twice about searching for "!gm ADDRESS" if I know i want to investigate an address via Google Maps. The benefit is that I can easily bounce to whatever service I know will respond to my query best. If the concern is that DDG should know what service to send me to automatically (Addresses go to google maps, for example), then I think it's just a disconnect with their goal, and probably you should stick with Google - it sounds like it works well for you and the privacy aspect of DDG just isn't compelling. And that's fine.
tjoff 13y ago
Searching for information should be less than searching for directions/services? Also, google maps and google are completely different things. I have no trouble going to google for maps and directions and search elsewhere...
- herbig 13y ago
  But directions are searches. If I know what directions you're searching for, that's more than enough information to build a profile of you that includes everything from what you eat, to what hobbies you have, or whether you're having an affair. It's all the same thing. There's no point in going half / half on search engines if your goal is privacy.
  - tjoff 13y ago
    Only if I search for every place I go to. If you had an affair you might search for an address once, which hardly implies anything. I don't need directions and couldn't for the life of me be bothered to google an address I already knew how to get to. I don't use google maps to find out where my work is every morning... There is a great point in limiting the number and kind of searches if your goal is privacy. There is a great point in going half / half on search engines. Especially on something as directions, if that was a big issue you could hardly live with an android phone (or iOS for that matter). Now, cell tower location tracking - that the EU forces my ISP to keep track of, could tell an automated algorithm all the things you've mentioned. And the only way to opt out of that would be to abandon mobile phones altogether which is quite a sacrifice (just leaving the phone when doing the stuff you'd rather no one would find out is a huge red flag).
glesica 13y ago
Huh? Who searches Google for addresses? I search Google Maps for addresses... I guess my mom, or someone else who thinks that the Google search bar is "the Internet" might do that, and perhaps other savvy people have workflows that I have never picked up, but I just don't see this as a big deal from my perspective.
- jholman 13y ago
  Wait, what's your workflow here, that you find searching GM more fluent than searching all-of-Google? (I'm genuinely curious, hoping to improve my workflow). Here's my approach: I type the address I want into Firefox's "awesomebar" (i.e. the URL bar). It loads Google, with a search result, with the top result being the address I want. I move my hand to the mouse, click for GM, it loads my search, and I continue using the mouse to navigate GM. The alternative (afaik) is loading GM somehow (bookmark? type URL and hit enter? other?), waiting a surprisingly long time for GM to load, then typing the address, then hitting enter, THEN I can move my hand to the mouse and start the mouse-oriented navigation.. It seems to me it has inferior flow. AND it requires me to either allocate screen space to a GM bookmark, or else type "maps.g" every time. So that's extra work. So although I don't think Google is "the internet"... I'm having trouble figuring out what workflow you're referring to that improves on my do-the-dumbest-thing approach.
  - toble 13y ago
    I too go directly to a search engine's map service for location stuff. One reason being that I don't want to become addicted to the overly accessible nature of Google's AI and service integration; becoming addicted would make an eventual switch to a competitor far more jarring. It's for the same reason that I use email clients rather than a service provider's webmail interface. Or Open Office over Google Docs.
  - dcsommer 13y ago
    I made "m" a search keyword in Firefox which queries google maps directly. So I just do ctrl-l m <address/query> enter. No cache misses, ahem mouse clicks, involved.
  - 13y ago

by yalogin 13y ago

imperialWicket 13y ago

Searching for an address on ddg shows a map, it's just not a google map. It also has links to investigate the address at Bing, Google, and MapQuest. Also, you can use !gm ADDRESS directly, and it passes your data to google over ssl via DDG's server. I think a big issue for DDG is this type of exclusivity complaint. And while it's a valid concern for some use cases, I really don't see DDG telling you to stop using other search services - they actively promote it. I use DDG all the time, but I don't think twice about searching for "!gm ADDRESS" if I know i want to investigate an address via Google Maps. The benefit is that I can easily bounce to whatever service I know will respond to my query best. If the concern is that DDG should know what service to send me to automatically (Addresses go to google maps, for example), then I think it's just a disconnect with their goal, and probably you should stick with Google - it sounds like it works well for you and the privacy aspect of DDG just isn't compelling. And that's fine.

tjoff 13y ago

Searching for information should be less than searching for directions/services? Also, google maps and google are completely different things. I have no trouble going to google for maps and directions and search elsewhere...

herbig 13y ago
But directions are searches. If I know what directions you're searching for, that's more than enough information to build a profile of you that includes everything from what you eat, to what hobbies you have, or whether you're having an affair. It's all the same thing. There's no point in going half / half on search engines if your goal is privacy.
- tjoff 13y ago
  Only if I search for every place I go to. If you had an affair you might search for an address once, which hardly implies anything. I don't need directions and couldn't for the life of me be bothered to google an address I already knew how to get to. I don't use google maps to find out where my work is every morning... There is a great point in limiting the number and kind of searches if your goal is privacy. There is a great point in going half / half on search engines. Especially on something as directions, if that was a big issue you could hardly live with an android phone (or iOS for that matter). Now, cell tower location tracking - that the EU forces my ISP to keep track of, could tell an automated algorithm all the things you've mentioned. And the only way to opt out of that would be to abandon mobile phones altogether which is quite a sacrifice (just leaving the phone when doing the stuff you'd rather no one would find out is a huge red flag).

glesica 13y ago

Huh? Who searches Google for addresses? I search Google Maps for addresses... I guess my mom, or someone else who thinks that the Google search bar is "the Internet" might do that, and perhaps other savvy people have workflows that I have never picked up, but I just don't see this as a big deal from my perspective.

jholman 13y ago
Wait, what's your workflow here, that you find searching GM more fluent than searching all-of-Google? (I'm genuinely curious, hoping to improve my workflow). Here's my approach: I type the address I want into Firefox's "awesomebar" (i.e. the URL bar). It loads Google, with a search result, with the top result being the address I want. I move my hand to the mouse, click for GM, it loads my search, and I continue using the mouse to navigate GM. The alternative (afaik) is loading GM somehow (bookmark? type URL and hit enter? other?), waiting a surprisingly long time for GM to load, then typing the address, then hitting enter, THEN I can move my hand to the mouse and start the mouse-oriented navigation.. It seems to me it has inferior flow. AND it requires me to either allocate screen space to a GM bookmark, or else type "maps.g" every time. So that's extra work. So although I don't think Google is "the internet"... I'm having trouble figuring out what workflow you're referring to that improves on my do-the-dumbest-thing approach.
- toble 13y ago
  I too go directly to a search engine's map service for location stuff. One reason being that I don't want to become addicted to the overly accessible nature of Google's AI and service integration; becoming addicted would make an eventual switch to a competitor far more jarring. It's for the same reason that I use email clients rather than a service provider's webmail interface. Or Open Office over Google Docs.
- dcsommer 13y ago
  I made "m" a search keyword in Firefox which queries google maps directly. So I just do ctrl-l m <address/query> enter. No cache misses, ahem mouse clicks, involved.
- 13y ago