15 ms·

The next version of DuckDuckGo

• yegg 12y ago
  Hi all, thanks for checking it out and we're looking forward to your feedback! This next version of DuckDuckGo is in public beta. Here's the post about it I just made: https://duck.co/forum/thread/5726/duckduckgo-reimagined-and-redesigned https://duck.co/forum/thread/5726/duckduckgo-reimagined-and-... There are still a lot known issues that we're still working through before we can make the transition. I'm sure this thread will uncover more :)
  • diggan 12y ago
    I just tried it out. Wanted to find "phpng" that was released just now. Search returns results for "phong" and no way to force it to use the term phpng. Otherwise, it looks good and works as well as the other "older" one. Good job.
    • yegg 12y ago
      Ahh, yes that is actually a fix we're presently working on and should make it in soon!
    • ToastyMallows 12y ago
      You can put quotes around phpng to force DDG to search that word. Though this should only be a temporary fix until the real problem is fixed.
      • deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
    • wink 12y ago
      I don't know what you mean by 'released'. If we're talking about the same thing, it's a) a single mailing list thread and b) a wiki page, which google finds. But as another check just revealed, DDG does not seem to index php.net very much, cf. https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=string+inurl%3Aphp.net https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=string+inurl%3Aphp.net It also does not find any php related content for my real name, whereas google does, a lot. Edit: my bad, it seems to be site: and not inurl:
    • nacs 12y ago
      If you use quotes around the search term, it does find 2 results: https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=%22phpng%22 https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=%22phpng%22
  • geekam 12y ago
    I'd like a little better code and programming related search. For anything related to code-search I have to switch to Google at this point.
    • yegg 12y ago
      Would love some specific examples we can take a look at. We're working on many programming related instant answers, e.g. https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=nginx+vs+apache https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=nginx+vs+apache & https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=perl+split https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=perl+split
      • stormbrew 12y ago
        In my experience, the problem with code searches is the extra work you have to go to to force a precise search. The above example of phpng, for example. I'm totally fine with being told I might find more results with a slightly different search, but it's infuriating to not at least be given the benefit of the doubt that I know what I actually want. Unlike the GP, this bothers me about google as well, though.
    • ep103 12y ago
      https://search.nerdydata.com/ https://search.nerdydata.com/ I forget the name of the other one, but there's another one similar to this too.
      • Svenstaro 12y ago
        http://www.symbolhound.com/ http://www.symbolhound.com/
  • vgnanand 12y ago
    The image and video search is slick. great job.
    • iconjack 12y ago
      How are you searching for images? I used !images but it just sent me to Google Images.
      • jaryd 12y ago
        https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=monkey+images https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=monkey+images
  • 3rd3 12y ago
    It looks absolutely beautiful! That really puts the interface of the Google search in a tight spot. Only one remark: While I like the effect that the full URL shows up when the mouse is above a search entry I would personally prefer to see the full URL all the time. I would be very happy if you could add an option to change that.
    • pestaa 12y ago
      You can often extract lots of extra information from the URL, most importantly the date of publishing (y/m/d).
    • RogerL 12y ago
      Agreed. For example, search for 'anaconda python'. In google, the second result is very obviously the download page for anaconda. In DDG? Good luck discovering that. Just one example that popped immediately to mind.
      • varkson 12y ago
        That's more the fault of the site itself for not using title tags properly, but, yeah I do agree that a full URL option would be ideal.
    • Schlaefer 12y ago
      Google does one thing right that makes me quit DDG: put the URL next/below the title. What and where together. 90+% I don't need the Why and parsing over it to find the URL is distracting.
  • ohblahitsme 12y ago
    How do you guys feel about telling us a bit about your algorithms and data structures? I'm always fascinated by that kind of stuff.
  • senorerik 12y ago
    It's looking great! My only gripe is the lack of contrast in the results. I find it a bit harder to parse than before. The image and video showcase is well thought out. It is digestible and smooth complement to the general search, well done!
  • terminado 12y ago
    For the love of christ, whatever you do, please don't ever implement "DuckDuckGo Instant®". This auto-complete predictive suggestion list business isn't half bad, but there's nothing I hate more about Google than their bloody "Instant" features.
    • coherentpony 12y ago
      Nothing wrong with implementing it and giving users an option to turn it on or off. Immediate disregard seems a little harsh.
      • Pacabel 12y ago
        Are you currently seeing that option somewhere? I looked in the settings, but I did not see it there, and I do not see any other way to disable that functionality.
        • coherentpony 12y ago
          Currently, no. My suggestion was to implement such an option.
    • cainetighe 12y ago
      We were on the fence about autocomplete for a variety of reasons, but tried to be careful about minimizing distraction. It was too great a vector to introduce !bang autocomplete :). As always, please let us know what you think as it evolves!
    • jfoster 12y ago
      Can you explain what you don't like about it? I was just thinking the (almost) opposite, that a full page reload after searching seems unnecessary.
      • terminado 12y ago
        Google Instant is irritating because I'm trying to type a search string into a field in the middle of the page, and as soon as I enter a single keystroke, my entire thought process is interrupted when the field I'm focusing on is thrown upwards to the top of the page, without waiting for me to confirm that I'm finished typing. So I want to search for "apple" and guess what: I type the letter "a"... Now the whole page is disrupted, and I have to stop, and check the page, to make sure the sudden change is what I expected it to be. Is the page doing what I intended? I only typed one letter... Did I actually type the letter "a", or did my finger slip and type the letter "s"? Wait, where's the field? Oh, it's up at the top of the page now... What was I doing? Oh, right, I was going to search for "apple"... Why did the page change, when I wanted it to stay put, while I complete my thought? Why didn't the page wait until I pressed the enter key, to confirm that I was finished, and ready to search for the intended query? Do I care about whether the page sends an ordinary post with a form submission, and reloads the page? No. Do I care about whether the page sends an AJAX request, and is re-rendered by a JavaScript library? No. I want the page to remain static and reliable while I perform my task. After I'm done typing, it can go crazy, and do whatever.
  • JetSpiegel 12y ago
    Having Image search is the best feature of all. Can we get a search page exclusively for images? I mean having that images popup occupy the entire page. As for the rest, as long as the dark/terminal themes still work (there are small bugs), that's fine by me.
    • pestaa 12y ago
      Clicking the grid icon in the top right corner gives you more results, but a dedicated image-only search result page would indeed be very appreciated.
  • jtfairbank 12y ago
    Bug Report 1. I search for "ng angular", which takes me to https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=ng%20angular 2. I've been to the top link before (http://angular-ui.github.io/ng-grid/). 3. I hover over the 'Visited Site' checkbox icon, and the hover text is obscured by the search area (specifically around the Image and Video tabs). On a related note, I find the interaction with checkboxes a little bit confusing. They disappear on hover when the text shows up (seems unnecessary, I'm left wondering why my icon disappeared). You can also hover over them on unvisited links and get the same message. Personally I'd prefer to see them as static icons, only shown on visited sites. I can hover over existing ones to get a message "you've visited this site before", which is clearer than "your browser indicates...". They do send a very clear message and are a great addition to the UI. Overall great job. Looks super clean, I love the image and video dropdowns... keep making it easy for me to use DDG! Edit: also submitted through your feedback system. Just gotta grab those hacker news points while they're there for the picking right? ;)
    • jtfairbank 12y ago
      May want to make your Feedback process a bit more direct- like have a "next.duckduckgo.com beta" box similar to "Help" and "Forum".
  • nickconfer 12y ago
    Hi Yegg. Very interesting update. Two suggestions for places.. 1) If I search "self storage columbia mo" I get place results but if I "search self storage 65203" I do not get place results. I noticed this does work for food using a more familiar zipcode like 90210.. but maybe still a little zip code work to be done. 2) What about when I search "thai" or "self storage" in general. DuckDuckGo is known for not tracking the user, but if I search something that with location information would most likely provide place results, shouldn't I be given some type of indicator that with just a zipcode or city name I could be given better results? That way you are educating new users while still providing them the results they need and the privacy DuckDuckGo is known for.
  • axelfreeman 12y ago
    Bug Report: If i play a video in the webseite, stop it, go to the video grid and then replay it, i have an echo. Tested with Chrome on Ubuntu. I also sent this via the feedback button. :-)
  • ronaldx 12y ago
    The auto-suggest feature feels like a step backwards in terms of privacy: - it indicates that there's a fairly thorough recording of searches going on, and acknowledges a reasonable possibility of keypress-by-keypress recording, and - it doesn't work as well as google's version which accounts for local variation, and which formed part of my decision to reject google in favour of ddg. Overall this feature creeps me out, in an "uncanny valley" kind of way. It makes me uncomfortable.
    • yegg 12y ago
      To be clear, we still don't collect or share personal information and auto-suggest does not impact that at all. I appreciate it may make you and others uncomfortable and we're sensitive to that, but it is not a change in terms of privacy. We simply do not associate queries with personal information (e.g. IP addresses) and in fact don't store any of it at all.
      • ronaldx 12y ago
        Understood. Can you clarify how you have the data to provide an auto-suggest?
        • andrewguenther 12y ago
          It looks like it is based on sets of bigrams and trigrams pulled from pages which they have indexed.
          • ronaldx 12y ago
            Quick example: "Is my password... cats6plus" does not appear to be pulled from any page(?)
        • pnathan 12y ago
          Not yegg, but if you store a database of queries, along with frequencies, you can do a prefix match on what's already in the search box and return that. I'm speculating that DDG does something that. It doesn't take any PII to do that unless the query itself includes PII. E.g., "websites operated by paul nathan" is pretty PII. :)
  • snird 12y ago
    Hi yegg, I want to express one wish I would like to see Duck Duck G0 maybe considering: I use duck duck go for its privacy, but it seems like duck duck go assumes I want absolute anonymity which is not necessarily right. I just want my own controlled privacy, and I want a good search engine that know me a bit. and I wish to give some of my privacy for that. what do I mean? if there will be an option to tell duck duck go what "categories" I'm interested in, so that it will use this data to give me better results I would love to do that. say, I can mark 'technology' and 'science' under my subject of interest and 'celebrity' and 'sports' under my subjects of disinterest. Do you think something like that might be possible someday or it completely goes against your philosophy?
  • dpcan 12y ago
    The Install in Chrome thing doesn't appear to work. Won't allow me to save even when the Keyword field is empty. Not sure if that's a Chrome thing or DDG thing. EDIT: Sorry, it looks like it installed the first time. I tried to do a search. It kept using Google. So I thought it didn't install. I tried again. The keyword had already been installed, so it didn't work. Turned out it was already installed and I had to manually set it as my search provider.
    • alexhektor 12y ago
      It does show however how hard chrome makes it to change search engines. Probably right at the line there between really hard and antitrust.
  • frik 12y ago
    The snippet excerpt needs some points "...". E.g. searching for "two": one two three four ... one-hundred, two-hundred, three
  • SrslyJosh 12y ago
    Things I like: 1) The checkbox for visited links. However, I think there should be an infobox (visible by default) explaining what it is the first few times you search. A link explaining how it works (for the privacy conscious) would also be good. Things I don't like: 1) Moving the favicon below the page snippet. I think it should actually be up top and larger, since it's useful for skimming results. 2) Lack of color/contrast. Feels like someone sucked the life out of the site. This is important, because (for example) when I'm skimming results it's helpful to have the page titles (blue) stand out from the snippet (black). 3) Left-aligned results. I find it easier to skim the results when they're centered, rather than left-aligned. This is something people who have been using Google won't notice, but after reading DDG's centered results for a year or so, going back feels jarring, like I'm going out of my way to read them there. The center of the screen seems to be where I look first for content. 4) Larger header. Vertical space is precious, especially when you consider how much is already consumed by an OS menu bar, browser chrome (titlebar, address bar, bookmark bar, tab bar, status bar) and (on Mac OS) the Dock at the bottom of the screen.
• bjitty 12y ago
  First impressions are good. Looks clean, I like auto complete. I also like the autocomplete for shortcuts (!). I've set it as my home page (was already using ddg for my main search). Is there a way to turn off the links at the bottom under the search? Set as homepage, etc? I keep mousing over them and the popups are distracting. I understand why they need to be there for new users. Great work and thanks for what you do.
  • daGrevis 12y ago
    To continue about auto-complete, would it be possible to add Tab button as a valid button to go to the next item (Shift-Tab to go back)?
• shenoybr 12y ago
  It is really beautiful. The minimalistic user interface is much more usable now. And the results for some test queries I ran were pretty good. Great work! I'm going to switch my default search engine for a few days and see how that goes.
• k-mcgrady 12y ago
  Looks beautiful. My only criticism is that you could make better use of all the whitespace the the right on the search screen. Maybe expand the width of search items to fill some unused space + increase the number of search items above the fold.
  • moollaza 12y ago
    You can actually increase the width of the results, if you prefer. It's in the settings: https://next.duckduckgo.com/settings https://next.duckduckgo.com/settings Click on the "Look and Feel" tab, then change the "width" :)
    • k-mcgrady 12y ago
      Great, that looks better, thanks.
• johnnyg 12y ago
  DDG has been my primary search engine for nearly 2 years. I love you guys for both your service and your mission. You've struggled in the past with local searches and map inferences to non-address searches (think "Godwin Park Houston"). I threw those at next.ddg and the result back were very good. I don't see having to !g a query for these in future. I'll edit as I use the beta in the next few days but first impression is "Hot damn, it works! Good job!" Edit 1: There are still dot coms and business I search for that I don't get the "map this for me" option. Examples: https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=cpap.com https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=cpap.com https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=men%27s+warehouse https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=men%27s+warehouse (do I want a wiki article or do I want to find the ones close?) https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=whole+foods https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=whole+foods Edit 2: The UI is so clean and nice.
  • cainetighe 12y ago
    Cool! We always received a fair amount of feedback about better local search and the redesign attempts to plug a few holes. Any feedback would be great; we're just getting started!
  • highwind 12y ago
    Try this query: https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=whole+foods+falls+church+va https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=whole+foods+falls+church+va
    • timr 12y ago
      http://www.bing.com/search?q=whole+foods+falls+church+va&go=&qs=n&form=QBLH&pq=whole+foods+falls+church+va&sc=2-25&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=7991e2a1bb3240d39d121259048b70d7 http://www.bing.com/search?q=whole+foods+falls+church+va&go=...
• mirkules 12y ago
  Yay for autocomplete and image search! I really have no more need for Google.
• gabriel34 12y ago
  Wow! Loved it, very clean yet all the info is there Plus image and video search! Really nice to have a clean image search interface with a clear download button. Do you proxy my search to youtube? What other sites are there? EDIT: also, great response to browser zoom
• Jake232 12y ago
  I've always wondered. How do these guys hit google search so much without hitting limitations? Google is pretty aggressive at banning bots, and I can't imagine Google have given a competitor API access or something like that. Proxies is out of the question for this scale too.
  • dmunoz 12y ago
    I'm fairly certain that they do not proxy searches to Google. I heave heard that they do use Bing and Yahoo search APIs, but this could be incorrect.
    • Mithrandir 12y ago
      You're correct: https://duck.co/help/results/sources https://duck.co/help/results/sources
    • Jake232 12y ago
      That makes sense, thanks.
• zyang 12y ago
  The button icons are a few px off - very unsettling.
  • yegg 12y ago
    Which ones? Perhaps this is a browser issue.
    • zyang 12y ago
      Here https://www.evernote.com/shard/s259/sh/83a4a781-7511-4815-b630-24ae641bc61a/ece030f2680b3a95d9073437704568fa https://www.evernote.com/shard/s259/sh/83a4a781-7511-4815-b6...
• jonalmeida 12y ago
  I started using DDG a long time ago when it first came out. I asked for a few stickers to add at my IT department, but I got a good bunch instead. There are now random DDG stickers in various cities around southern Ontario.
  • pestaa 12y ago
    Any way to get some more in Europe?
    • jonalmeida 12y ago
      You can buy some from: http://www.stickermule.com/duckduckgo http://www.stickermule.com/duckduckgo I still have a few with me. I can send you some if you want (contact details in profile).
• sergiotapia 12y ago
  Well kudos on letting my right click and copy URL from search results! I hate how Google insists on using https://www.google.com.bo/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDUQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fguides.rubyonrails.org%2F4_0_release_notes.html&ei=E-BnU4K0IaTNsQT6x4LwAw&usg=AFQjCNFpeY6-5J6FqUmWRt-TOBA76MX3Qg&sig2=yDluopjR_TRPimLQt-ohvA https://www.google.com.bo/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=we... - yeah Google, totally makes sense. Godspeed duckduckgo!
  • deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  • tinalumfoil 12y ago
    The reason Google sends you through a redirect instead of directly to the site is to prevent those sites from tracking what you searched to get there. When websites look in their referrer header they'll see http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rc...url=http%3A%2F%2Fexample.org%2F...1,d.aWc" http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rc...url=http%3A%2F%2Fexample... instead of "https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=example" https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=example". This gives them the advantage of you only being able to see what Google Searches brought people to their site through Google Analytics.
    • magicalist 12y ago
      > This gives them the advantage of you only being able to see what Google Searches brought people to their site through Google Analytics Search terms come in Google's Webmaster Tools. You can only get them in Analytics if you hook up your Webmaster Tools account to your Analytics Account.
      • path411 12y ago
        It is true that it does promote analytics. However, one key feature of Google analytics giving privacy as a normal user is that you can never actually look at the profile of a user. You can look at stats such as 10/100 people used the "Best Hammers" search term, and that 80/100 people come from the United States. But you can't say look at X IP address and see where they come from, what browser they use, and what search term they used.
• joshbert 12y ago
  This is fantastic. I already had DDG as my search engine, this just takes it to the next level. I'll be looking forward to the full release. Kudos!
• mercnet 12y ago
  I just recently switched to duckduckgo and I wasn't a fan of the search results UI (spent a lot of time in settings) but this looks beautiful!
• Skalman 12y ago
  In general, it looks really good. - I'd like some more focus on keyboard navigation. Make sure that everything looks good when tabbing, even if you've used arrow keys first. - Anti-phishing: A long domain name will trim the end in the "More from ..." link. Instead it would make sense to trim the beginning. - Needs better contrast.
• galapago 12y ago
  Guide: This room is the most popular part of our tour. Milhouse: It's just like the other rooms. Guide: Yes, but with one important difference: [looks over] Oh, they took that out. Yes, it is just like the other rooms.
  • prottmann 12y ago
    My personal view: I am a technican. I want to see the number of results. I don't like AutoSroll. I remember the page where i find a result, so i jump to the page, with endless scroll, i did not find things again. The sign of clicked links is a good idea. Mark a personal favorite site in combination with my search term would be a great feature. E.g. i remember i search something about nodejs but i forgot the sitename, my browser bookmark did not help me. But when i see my old search about "nodejs" and the favorite or clicked pages, that would be a great thing. Forget google, if somebody want to use google, he can use google. So please implement usefull functions that help people with their daily work.
• cubancigar11 12y ago
  I sure hope I am not the only one who dislikes the new look. Ref: 1. Old DDG: http://s388.photobucket.com/user/cubancigar11/media/snapshot2.png.html http://s388.photobucket.com/user/cubancigar11/media/snapshot... 2. New DDG: http://s388.photobucket.com/user/cubancigar11/media/snapshot1-4.png.html http://s388.photobucket.com/user/cubancigar11/media/snapshot... There are so many problems here: 1. Poor contrast of font-colors. 2. Poor choice of font - bold doesn't really standout as much as it should. 3. Font spacing has increased which forces me to scroll down thus breaking my thought process. 4. Icons now take vertical space instead of horizontal. 5. Mouse-hover color change has poor contrast. On my desktop I can only see it through a specific unnatural angle.
  • ep103 12y ago
    I think it looks better than the original, though. That giant red bar at the top, with a yellow box underneath always reminded me of the original ask jeeves search page, with its giant blue bar up top http://i.imgur.com/7LYUXre.jpg http://i.imgur.com/7LYUXre.jpg
  • pessimizer 12y ago
    You're not the only one, but I think this look will work better with people who are not me (people like me are already a pretty captive group for DDG), and who currently use other search engines. It's very trendy. I prefer growth for the search engine over the old look.
• saiko-chriskun 12y ago
  I would really love to switch but it still pales in comparison to google on a lot of searches. http://bit.ly/1ur3zP2 http://bit.ly/1ur3zP2 vs. https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=medium+top+collections https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=medium+top+collections
  • ep103 12y ago
    It uses the bing / yahoo APIs, and it doesn't use search context / user profiling to attempt to fuzzy guess your intended results.
  • gabriel34 12y ago
    not sure what are you talking about. Google results for me are as follow: 1. medium.com/collections 2. medium.com/top100/may-2013 (what I would be looking for except it's from last year) 3. an article with the title "Top Medium Collections everybody should follow" 4. images (why here?) of... purses and drawer handles?(wtf? why is this here?) 5. List of Medium collections | Niccolò Brogi At the side some advertising for something that looks like bird cages or outdoor lamp protectors from Google Shops and "Tops at Macy's‎" DDG's: 1.Medium Top 100 for March 2014 (much more recent than googles and at 1st position)
    • gabriel34 12y ago
      To be honest DDG's other results were pretty much garbage for this query, but in the end of the day it brought me a much more relevant page in it's number 1 spot without tracking me. Maybe you trained google well. I have not used it much in ages
• a3n 12y ago
  Very pretty. And thank you for not using infinite scroll.
• Doctor_Fegg 12y ago
  Looks great! Your new maps need to have an on-map credit to OpenStreetMap, as that's where the map data comes from, and OSM's licence requires attribution. osm.org/copyright explains how.
  • aroman 12y ago
    It does. Click the "i" button: Map data © OpenStreetMap contributors, CC-BY-SA
    • Doctor_Fegg 12y ago
      That's not on-map, that's hidden behind a click. osm.org/copyright makes it very clear that the attribution needs to be on-map. You don't see Google permitting people to hide their brand away like that!
      • xrjn 12y ago
        You should rant about runkeeper too, as they do the same thing by hiding the OSM contributor information.
      • incanus77 12y ago
        Apple does this too in all of their uses of OSM in their maps. There is some OSM community discussion on the UX behind this here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/lxbarth/diary/21769 http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/lxbarth/diary/21769
        • stephen_g 12y ago
          Apple's maps are not just OpenStreetMap - there's a lot of other data sources in it too. For the OSM data Apple do use, I think it's quite old OSM data from 2010-2011 or something. As far as I remember, they used that because the license changed after that, so I believe that's under different terms.
    • glennon 12y ago
      Doctor_Fegg makes a good point. The OSM Legal FAQ states: "For a browsable electronic map (e.g. embedded in a web page or mobile phone application), the credit should appear in the corner of the map, as commonly seen with map APIs/libraries such as Google Maps." Link: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#3a._I_would_like_to_use_OpenStreetMap_maps._How_should_I_credit_you.3F http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#3a._I_would_lik...
• ancarda 12y ago
  If you are using DuckDuckGo for privacy reasons, I strongly suggest you use https://startpage.com/ https://startpage.com/ instead. DuckDuckGo isn't much better than Google; both of them hijack your links. This gives an opportunity to track what you click on. If you watch carefully your links go to "r.duckduckgo.com" -- this page also doesn't use SSL. For example: http://r.duckduckgo.com/l/?kh=-1&uddg=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FDuckDuckGo http://r.duckduckgo.com/l/?kh=-1&uddg=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikip... StartPage doesn't hijack links, it (optionally) uses POST and you never send a referer header so traffic looks organic.
  • gabriel34 12y ago
    I don't see it; links on ddg are always direct to me; perhaps it's only for advertising links or something like anonym.to to hide some referer you'd send otherwise. What browser are you using?
    • ancarda 12y ago
      I'm using Firefox. I see a lot of r.duckduckgo.com entries in my history. Edit: I can't replicate in Chrome or Safari but if I change my user-agent in Safari, it begins hijacking my URLs. The JavaScript is obfuscated so it's hard to tell if it's actually checking for Firefox or not. The function it calls is DDG.get_http_redirect
      • yegg 12y ago
        You can read more about that here: https://duck.co/blog/https-on-by-default https://duck.co/blog/https-on-by-default It has no privacy impact since we do not store or collect personal information.
        • ancarda 12y ago
          >we do not store or collect personal information. But the redirection is done over plain HTTP and not HTTPS. If you don't have a wildcard certificate, you could use /r?url=... instead of a subdomain. Ideally, the best setup would be to use the "noreferrer" attribute on anchor tags. It's a relatively new standard but perhaps you could detect if it's supported and then use that rather than a redirector? https://www.webkit.org/blog/907/webkit-nightlies-support-html5-noreferrer-link-relation/ https://www.webkit.org/blog/907/webkit-nightlies-support-htm...
• TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
  So: feedback. The contrast is too low. It is hard to read on my (relatively bad) laptop screen. Popins only when your mouse is over something are frustrating. My mouse is not tied to my eyes! In particular, if you're scrolling with your mouse in the center of the screen, the pop-in happens a moment after you stop scrolling, which is distracting. Also, I don't like hiding information by default in general. Additionally: there is no way to view the full URL for long URLs - they expand, but only to a point. The top header staying put is bad from a screen real estate POV. I've got a widescreen screen, and as such I'm cramped for vertical space but horizontal space is ample. Finally: having the right arrow to the left of the domain to search the domain, and the popin on the right saying "more from <x>" seems redundant.
• Splendor 12y ago
  Chrome 34 on Windows 7. Can't read this bubble when it's on the first result: https://i.imgur.com/SrplpW4.png https://i.imgur.com/SrplpW4.png
• plainOldText 12y ago
  I really like the simplicity of this version of DuckDuckGo. The only thing I'd change, is the color used for domains. I personally look at the domain (among other things) when I decide to click on a result, and having a more noticeable domain name would be extremely helpful allowing me to quickly make a decision about which results are worthy. Just my personal thoughts.
• antris 12y ago
  Based in US, the line "The search engine that doesn't track you" means nothing.
  • canadaj 12y ago
    Yes it does? The search engine won't track you, but that doesn't stop your ISP or anyone else along the chain.
    • antris 12y ago
      I mean that the guarantee from an US-based company that they won't track you is meaningless, because they can be ordered in secret court to hand over all their information with a gag order. After that the only way for us to know would be a whistleblower. And even then we would only know that we are unsafe, not that we are safe.
      • winslow 12y ago
        Except DuckDuckGo doesn't hold that information in the first place [1]. So a request by the government for information on a user will have very little information. [1] - https://duckduckgo.com/privacy https://duckduckgo.com/privacy
      • andrewguenther 12y ago
        They would have to keep any of that information in the first place...
  • JunkDNA 12y ago
    Please don't keep it to yourself! What is this privacy-protecting search engine that you've been using that is immune to US or other intelligence agencies' snooping?
    • antris 12y ago
      Who said there is one?
    • 12y ago
• bhartzer 12y ago
  One of the problem I see is that it appears that this version is that there is too much emphasis on keyword rich domain names. On one search query that I did just now, 14 of the top 20 search results for that had the keyword in the domain name. A similar search (different city + keyword search), different city but same keywords as above, reveals 15 with the keyword out of 20 search results.
• BorisMelnik 12y ago
  what a clean look. love the fact that you have incorporated search features such as the carousel and video previews. I really like duck duck go as a search engine. I think one of the main reasons I have not fully adopted it is email/gmail and other Google offerings. all in all the fact that privacy is on the side of the user is so key for me. I hate having a copy of everything I Google get stored somewhere, even in private mode.
• fsck--off 12y ago
  I use DuckDuckGo as my primary search engine and have had a positive experience using it. This redesign incorporates two of the worst design trends today: very low contrast text and gratuitously, obnoxiously large fixed headers. I dislike fixed headers on any non-phone/tablet UI because almost all laptop and desktop screens are widescreen. Fixed position elements on the sides of the screen make much more sense, although poor implementations are very unpleasant and can create a jarring parallax effect. Unfortunately, fixed elements on the sides are soooo MySpace and have fallen out fashion, and many sites waste most of the space on the sides. The header in the redesign in obscenely large and the new page shows me less results at a time. I have young and healthy eyes with 20/20 vision. Even so, when I use my laptop for coding and reading text, I turn the brightness down because it is easier on my eyes and does not give me headaches. I believe that the best practice is to make text #000 on a white background or very light background (like news.yc does), and to let users adjust the brightness of their display if this is uncomfortable. There have been assertions by that lighter text with white is better (and unfortunately this is the latest and laziest design trend), but I have seen no formal evidence of this and believe that this is mostly a combination of overbright display screens and poor text rendering by OSes and browsers. If you turn the brightness of your screen down, you solve the "too much contrast" problem (if it ever truly existed) and can tell when any text isn't #000. For me, DuckDuckgo's current snippet display color is to light at #333, and ridiculous at #595959. If I set the brightness of my laptop to the maximum setting, the snippet text is more tolerable but still uncomfortable. I dislike the neo-flat, iOS-like buttons, but they don't really make the site any harder to use. I find that neo-flat buttons are almost have an underlying hypocrisy. The idea behind the flat painting movement is that you can discern what was called "optical depth" without using traditional perspective to mimic the depth you see with stereoscopic vision. The neo-flat movement is based on the idea that you don't need to underline hyperlinks or add perspective based shadows and gradients to distinguish what a button is because you can just use colors alone or make everything a link. If this were really true, then you wouldn't need to make the neo-flat buttons change colors when you mouse over them, because it should be obvious that they are links. You can see similar hypocrisy in Google's A/B testing of non-centered labels in certain neo-flat buttons on their websites (especially YouTube). Edit: I rewrote the first sentence of the third paragraph to make it more clear.
  • 12y ago
• opendomain 12y ago
  I hate to say this, because I am a BIG fan of DuckDuckGo, but I think your ranking algorithm can be improved. I collect domains for my open source project, OpenDomain. The sites do not actually have too much valuable content - just placeholders so people can find them. I just checked, and quite a few of my domains are listed very highly on DDG. Not that I am complaining, but I think they are rated high just because the keywords are in the domains themselves. For example, "NoSQL", "JSON", "Free TV", "liposculpture", "WebPlatform", and "Helpher" all scored top hits for my sites. I am not asking for my sites to be removed specifically, but we should try to get better results - I have done NOTHING for SEO on these domains - just owned the keyword.
  • rk0567 12y ago
    I've also observed that, .com, .net domains rank much higher (even if it's not any good) as compared to less popular extensions (.me, .co etc).
• higherpurpose 12y ago
  I'm not up to date on what kind of algorithm you're using, but last I checked you were still mostly relying on Bing, is that true? Are you guys working on your own search/indexing engine so you don't depend on any of the big guys that might eventually pull the rug from under you? I guess what I'm saying is, if Microsoft were to deny you access to Bing tomorrow, would DDG still be a pretty good search engine, or would it fall apart?
• shmerl 12y ago
  Is it WIP? Default one still looks the way it was.
• bluthru 12y ago
  Please make the fixed header half as tall. Put "Images Video" to the side of the search box. This is nitpicky, but I don't like how an entire result is a link with a hovered background color. I also don't like how additional content appears when hovered. Please don't trim the URL and hide it unless the result is being hovered on.
• mfrommil 12y ago
  I really like the transition from normal search -> images & videos. Wish there was a way to have news embedded in search results similar to google, though.
  • bsstoner 12y ago
    Try adding 'news' to the query: https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=amazon+news https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=amazon+news
• marincounty 12y ago
  I hope they destroy Google.
• sjs382 12y ago
  Proxima Nova at 600 weight displays really weird on my work machine: http://i.imgur.com/O9GU0TG.png http://i.imgur.com/O9GU0TG.png. Is there a chance you might reconsider the font choice? Looks great, if I force Helvetica.
  • yegg 12y ago
    Wow, that's strange! What are the machine/browser specs?
  • sdougbrown 12y ago
    Do you have Proxima Nova installed locally? The font stack does look for a locally installed version of the font first - it looks like it's applying the 900 font weight instead of 600.
    • sjs382 12y ago
      I did. Seems that I had the regular weight and black version only. Disabled the "black" and it is rendering better now. Looks amazing, once I fixed that issue.
• dpatrick86 12y ago
  Please continue working on the non-aesthetic fundamentals. I reported this query previously to you guys, and it appears nothing has happened. It concerns me because it's so nonsensical it erodes my trust in your results, and it has persisted like this for over a year at this point.... If you search "IGF-1" on DDG you get maybe 100 results. Now lets try the same search on Google, but with a handicap. Let's be even more strict and only show results that contain this keyword specifically in the title using "intitle:igf-1". You'll find 69,500 results (at the time of this posting).
  • boyter 12y ago
    Are they relevant though? How many results do you need? Also Google is wildly optimistic about the number of results. Try paging through and it might cap out at the same number.
  • boyter 12y ago
    I cannot edit my other post, but paging through Google gives 363 pages... https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=IGF-1#hl=en&q=IGF-1&start=370 https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=IGF-1#hl=en&q=IG... Far less then the 5 million it claims to know about on the first page, https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=IGF-1#hl=en&q=IGF-1 https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=IGF-1#hl=en&q=IG...
• dpatrick86 12y ago
  Please continue working on the non-aesthetic fundamentals. I reported this query previously to you guys, and it appears nothing has happened. I'm sharing it here, because it concerns me: it's so nonsensical it erodes my trust in your results. If you search "IGF-1" on DDG you get maybe 100 results. Now lets try the same search on Google, but with a handicap. Let's be even more strict and only show results that contain this keyword specifically in the title using "intitle:igf-1". You'll find 69,500 results (at the time of this posting).
• mfrommil 12y ago
  Would be great if the settings menu expanded with hovering instead of a click (similar to the 3 buttons on the bottom). It's far enough to the side that accidental hovers could be avoided, while saving a click.
• olq 12y ago
  I think it looks great! Tried it in my kind of night mode: dimmed display, very orange f.lux setting and inverted colours, and it works good. I like the design a lot! Why not widening the results column in larger windows and thus fit more results vertically? Maybe really large site logos/icons would be cool.
• ethana 12y ago
  Off topic, but I still think the domain name is a few strokes too long for people. edited: Oh hell no, duck.com redirects to google. That sucks. duckie.com is parked, buy it?
  • dmunoz 12y ago
    There is ddg.gg already.
  • orangewarp 12y ago
    It would be a classy move if Google gave duck.com to duckduckgo.
• dorgo 12y ago
  pls dont open new tabs if a search result is clicked with right mouse button. I use right mouse button for mouse-gestures. My browser dont permit to disable right-mouse-button-context-menu. If I click with the right mouse-button on a search result then a new tab is opened AND a context-menu is shown.
• jhomhenvhisst 12y ago
  Search: åäö "Showing 35 åäö Images" Great.
  • cainetighe 12y ago
    Confirm fixed?
    • jhomhenvhisst 12y ago
      yes, nice!
• dredmorbius 12y ago
  I've been using DDG intermittently for the past two years, and solidly (with fallbacks to other search engines) since June, 2013. Overall the design looks decent. Remember: less is more. I don't know if features were modified since fskc--off posted, but I'd agree strongly with both his primary concerns: ditch ALL fixed headers and footers, on ALL devices, and keep maximal contrast throughout the site. My eyes are no longer quite so young as they once were, and low contrast designs are bullshit. The "off-black on off-white" argument applies only to print materials, not online, where contrasts are inherently lower, and are worsened by increased ambient light. I find the grey background on the focused search entry distracting. I've removed it. The outline is sufficient (if not excessive itself). I find the font sizes in general too small. I prefer specifying fonts in points not pixels, and very, very strongly recommend that all text-oriented dimensions be either in ems or percentage of screen width. In general, don't size text elements if you can help it. I set an overall content width of between 45-50em for most sites, with a minimum 2em margin (and that's as a fallback). I apply my own CSS to many sites I visit, some 1000+ at present (yes, including HN, increasing contrast and font sizes being principle changes). I notice the browser URL no longer reflects the present search. I dislike that change as I'll copy and paste search URLs fairly frequently. Please retain the previous behavior. The search syntax icons on the RH side of the page underneath the "Spread DDG" link looked at first to me like social share link crap (another feature I strip from most sites). I'd suggest putting the "spread" link elsewhere and more clearly differentiating it from the actual search tools. Of features missing on DDG which force me back to other sites, the lack of time-bounded search is probably the biggest (other than simply lacking expected search results). I've been impressed by the integration of OpenStreetMap results and would like to see similar type development, as well as your use of Wikipedia and similar informational sources in results. Overall: fairly subtle changes, and gripes notwithstanding, not bad. That's actually high praise ;-) Also: I'd very much like to thank you for actually previewing the design in advance of releasing it. While online services make drastic changes possible, they're not always welcome, and I feel far too many sites make the egregious error of dropping a new design on users with no warning. For the "next.duckduckgo.com" site, I've got the following CSS tweaks presently applied. All but the last are legacy, some may no longer be strictly necessary: #header_wrapper { position: static; } #header_wrapper #header #header_content_wrapper #header_content #header_button_wrapper #header_button #header_button_menu_wrapper #header_button_menu { z-index: 2; } #search_form { font-size: 15pt; } .bang_suggestion:hover { background-color: rgb(228,246, 255); } .bangwrap { z-index: 2; } .snippet { font-size: 14pt; } p, body p, li, body li, dt, body dt, dd, body dl { font-size: 15pt; } .web-result:hover { background: none; background-color: inherit; }
• Aaronneyer 12y ago
  Is there any chance in functionality with the new version or is it just the prettier search page?
• Aaronneyer 12y ago
  Is there any chance in functionality with the new version or is it just the prettier search page?
• Aaronneyer 12y ago
  Is there any chance in functionality with the new version or is it just the prettier search page?
• Aaronneyer 12y ago
  Is there any chance in functionality with the new version or is it just the prettier search page?
• lnanek2 12y ago
  I don't really like the "doesn't track you part." How is it going to give as good results if it doesn't track people? Clicks is the best way to tell which results are good, and my clicks especially.
  • whatts 12y ago
    You can still count clicks without associating it with the user who clicked. Anyway, the "doesn't track you" part is the whole point of DDG. If you don't like/need that, you can simply use Google.
• stonogo 12y ago
  Please don't apply any of these changes to the html version. It's my favorite websearch interface. I would also like an option to disable r.duckduckgo.com redirects.
  • claudius 12y ago
    Passing kd=-1 in the URL disables redirects for me.
    • stonogo 12y ago
      thanks!
• systemizer 12y ago
  I don't understand how a service can be both secure and centralized. You'd have to give 100% of your trust to a single entity. I'm not pointing fingers, but DDG is a good example of this situation. If you want greater security, you have to allocate trust amongst many entities. This is a practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance problem (http://techtv.mit.edu/videos/16444-practical-byzantine-fault-tolerance http://techtv.mit.edu/videos/16444-practical-byzantine-fault... ). My current trust model is primarily made up of my friends and family; not a third party organization online, regardless of how they market it. If I put my trust in them, my security would only be compromised if ((N-1)/3) worked together. (see http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/6.824-2012/papers/castro-practicalbft.pdf http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/6.824-2012/papers/castro-practical...) Wouldn't my activity be more secure if it was built upon that? I'm not proposing any implementations; just food for thought.
• mihok 12y ago
  I used to use DDG as my primary search provider for half a year, was unhappy with the user experience/search results but after a couple preliminary searches, everything is looking up! Well done DDG, really, really stoked for you guys to get better. (And it looks like you definatly are!)
• YoukaiCountry 12y ago
  One thing that is bothering me is the filling in of search queries when you mouse over them. One wrong move with the mouse if you have a query partially typed in, and you have to backspace all of the automatically filled in stuff. Other than that, I think it's pretty nice.
• monotypical 12y ago
  Just wanted to say, had heard a lot about ddg, but I never really gave it a fair shot until now, and it's awesome, before you even get to the privacy stuff!. Thanks.
• peutichat 12y ago
  If you're into alternative search engines that don't track you, You should try psykoo: http://www.psykoo.com http://www.psykoo.com
  • dewey 12y ago
    - So they are not tracking me, but everyone else is reading my search queries because there's no https support. - It's really slow - It's ugly No thanks.
• claudius 12y ago
  There doesn’t really seem to be any improvement over the old page and the only thing that annoys me with the old page (used with kj=b2&kl=wt-wt&ko=f&kp=-1&kx=b) is the fact that instant answers are loaded not immediately. That is, if I click on the first link before WolframAlpha pops up with something more-or-less helpful, I sometimes accidentally click on that area.
• yahelc 12y ago
  Anyone know how DDG is detecting this: > Your browser indicates if you've visited this link. I was under the impression that browsers try to block sites from being able to detect this. Traditionally, the hack has been with the :visited pseudo-class, but not sure if there's more at play here. Kind of a weird feature for a search engine whose tagline is "The search engine that doesn't track you."
  • lojack 12y ago
    It appears to use the :visited pseudo-class. You'll notice if you click that area it'll link to the page.
• zephyz 12y ago
  If I disable meanings in the settings I see video and picture results. Is that the intended behaviour?
• mryingster 12y ago
  Thank you for adding image search! That's about the only thing I really rely on Google for. Giving it its own dedicated full page rather than just a section would be very welcomed as well. Two other things. Others have mentioned having the links always blue, not just when rolling over. I would like this as well to make it a little quicker/more evident where the physical link is. Secondly, I like the link to see more results from whichever domain, however I am wondering if we can also have a "hide results from whatever domain" so we can hide useless spammy domains that may show up in our results. This is a huge problem on Google, though I haven't noticed it as badly on DDG. At any rate, I love DDG! Thanks for the hard work!
• brokenparser 12y ago
  I love Duck and the focus on privacy it has, but lately I've been using searx and had more success with it than ddg given the same queries. You can find running instances here: https://github.com/asciimoo/searx/wiki/Searx-instances https://github.com/asciimoo/searx/wiki/Searx-instances
• pi-squared 12y ago
  Don't center and add the fixed horizontal limit for images when there is an instant answer.
• atmosx 12y ago
  I would love to use DDG as my default search engine but anything other than Google is extremely poor when it comes to the non-English side of the WWW. Google was way better at sorting Greek web-pages last time I checked. I'll give DDG another try though, might turned better...
• ThePhysicist 12y ago
  Of course the first thing I did was a vanity search of my name and I have to say I'm really impressed (and a bit shocked) by the quality of the results: All my social media profiles, all my websites, every project I contributed to, even websites where people credited me for my work when they used it in their own projects, all neatly sorted and with great context information. Definitely on par, if not better, than Google and visually much easier to digest. Amazing job!
  • davidcelis 12y ago
    Wish I could say the same :\. The top result for "David Celis" is a LinkedIn directory of people with my name. The first result that's actually me is my Twitter account, at number 3. My actual homepage, http://davidcel.is/ http://davidcel.is/, doesn't even appear on the first page. Guess I need to become more important?
• rcamera 12y ago
  Having been using DDG as my primary search engine for pretty much 6 years now, I really disliked the new redesign. As mentioned in another comment, the contrast is really bad, I find it hard to read and focus on a given result. This is much worse when using f.lux. I also disliked the left-align on everything, I rather have it centered as it currently is. When using big widescreen monitors there is a lot of whitespace in the middle of the screen and the results show up all the way to the lower left corner... It is pretty uncomfortable to look all the way there and this makes it harder on the contrast part too because there is so much bright light already coming from the background and the font color is a light greyish. This is specially worse in multi-monitor setups. The image and video search tabs are great, and I really like the fact they replace zero-click results when you click on them, but I wouldn't leave them in the fixed header, there is just no need for them to be there. This would reduce the size of the fixed header and make it even better. When scrolling results using j and k, the greyish background it adds to each result makes the contrast even worse. I remember when they were yellowish, they were better back then, imo. But current design works too. I also miss the current border around it, it makes it much easier for you to find yourself if you are switching tabs and going back to the results page. I haven't measured, but the font also seems a couple pixels smaller, is it? It is also harder to distinguish between results. It all seems like a blob of text, hard to skim through results looking just at the title. In the current design this is fantastically easy, given titles are blue. I only read stuff below the title if the title is of interest. In the new design this is much harder to do, there is not enough contrast between the title and the text under it. Keep it blue, there is absolutely no reason to change this.
  • yaddayadda 12y ago
    All of what @ rcamera said. I really like the current visuals and layout much better than the beta, particularly the contrast and blue links. I also like the favicon to the left of the page title in results. I actually like the instant suggestions. And I like the "Images" and "Video" buttons at the top, HOWEVER I'm a massive !bang! fan, and will differ to !i and !v. Although I would prefer that both methods go to a generic images and video searches (as opposed to Google Images and YouTube). ALSO, for me when I roll over a link I want to see the url in the bottom of my browser (forgetting what Firefox calls this) and I'm not getting it with the new layouts Video suggestions.
• gk1 12y ago
  I'm getting a weird bug that's making the results page un-usable: When I move my cursor up and down in the results area, the listings start scrambling around like crazy. I can't even tell if they're being scrolled through or if they're just randomly changing. I am on a Lenovo Yoga 13 (which is an ultrabook with a touchscreen) using Chrome 34.0.1847.131 m on Windows. I suspect DDG thinks I'm on a mobile device and then interprets cursor movements as finger swiping. Edit: Yep, seems to think I'm on a mobile device. Menu is hidden behind a menu icon, but I can't get it to open with a mouseclick--only with a tap on the screen. The site is completely unusable for anyone with a Windows 8 laptop (ie, laptops with touchscreens), unless they're using it exclusively as a tablet.
• neil_s 12y ago
  The design is nice, but I still don't find the results relevant (from the small sample size that I tested). For example, I searched for 'alternatives to minimum wage' because of a recent debate, and got Yahoo Answers as the first result, with a bunch of unknown sites after. On the other hand, Google returned the Washington Post, Bloomberg View and other credible organisations. The design is certainly much nicer on the eyes, without the blue links and with the little 'read' tick marks, but perhaps the focus should be on better search algorithms first?
• curiouscats 12y ago
  The one box can be nice but takes up too much room so I have it set to off. It would be better if you gave me a simple click to view one box (I can often guess the small number of cases where viewing it would be useful - such as thinking a map will show up or in the case I wanted the wiki summary). Off the top of my head just having a link after the products link that said 0-click box (or something) if it was settings had it off would be useful.
• rockdiesel 12y ago
  Why does DDG display rover.ebay.com links in search results? From my understanding rover.ebay.com is used for ebay affiliate links. Is this one way DDG makes money? If not, why would they display rover.ebay.com links in search results over traditional ebay links? EDIT: Looks like I answered my own question. They generate revenue through affiliate links. For anyone else curious, here's the link - https://duck.co/help/company/advertising-and-affiliates https://duck.co/help/company/advertising-and-affiliates
• ErikRogneby 12y ago
  I like it. my one nitpick: On Mobile, if you do "show more meaning" there is no undo of that action. I thought the X might collapse down to the preview but it removed it altogether.
• Buonaparte 12y ago
  I just want to say that I love DuckDuckGo. I feel like the majority of search results I get from Google and Bing these days are just advertising one thing or another. DuckDuckGo is a much better experience.
• nfriedly 12y ago
  Shoot! I'll be able to retire http://ddgg.nfriedly.com http://ddgg.nfriedly.com soon!
  • nfriedly 12y ago
    Doh! That was supposed to say "Whoot!" but my phone autocorrected it and I didn't notice until after the edit timer was up. But to clarify, I'm happy DDG is incorporation this feature :)
• im3w1l 12y ago
  If I may make a feature request: I would like some way to search that preserves symbols in the query. For instance I would like to be able to search for Lab* and not get results for L-A-B, L.A.B etc.
• Ryel 12y ago
  I think the new look is awesome but I'd still use DDG either way.
• ugexe 12y ago
  Something that has bothered me in the old version as well as this version is the wiki-summary/product/images/videos header. Often times (especially when im using a VPN) the search results load before whatever needs to be loaded in the header, so I will go to click a result and then the header expands into my click. This means I go to a page I did not intend. It needs to be a fixed size or its size needs to be determined before listing search results.
  • MrGando 12y ago
    I totally hate that Header too.
• nemoniac 12y ago
  I also use DuckDuckGo as my primary search engine and have had very positive experience using it. But the single worst thing about ddg is that it's still not possible to deactivate the "did you mean?" functionality. I rarely make typing errors so I spend most keystrokes on ddg putting quotes around things that I did mean.
• twodayslate 12y ago
  The frontpage is a lot more pleasing to the eye, however, the search results are much more readable on the current layout. The text is not very crisp under Chrome on my Windows 8.1 machine.
• yetfeo 12y ago
  One thing that would be nice to fix in the new interface: If I use the DDG TOR hidden service, 3g2upl4pq6kufc4m.onion, do a search and click on a search result the link goes via a DDG redirect from r.duckduckgo.com. This should be using the hidden service domain, not the duckduckgo.com domain. As it is the redirect goes over a tor exit node rather than directly via the hidden service.
• NamTaf 12y ago
  Please make sure the hamburger menu button on the right and the close X button inside the menu are centred (edit: with respect to one another) - currently, the close button shifts down and left from the position of the hamburger button. Keeping it in the one spot is one of those polish things that instantly stands out to me.
• timgws 12y ago
  The one thing that kills be about DDG is that when I search for "who is the prime minister of australia" it get's nearly everything wrong. Google gives me a result of a name ("Tony Abbott"), while DDG starts giving me an article from Wikipedia describing the role (this one is forgivable...) DDG Images shows the first six images as being previous prime ministers. http://imgur.com/a/wWgXD http://imgur.com/a/wWgXD
• dieg0 12y ago
  Nice redesign, as a designer, developer and user: I like I don't like the way that video search is actually Youtube search (to use 'video' is misleading, sad face). And I imagine when it comes to images is the same. DuckDuckGo, if you would please add other media sources... Google used to do this, now it's all about keeping the user inside Google’s ecosystem.
  • jagtalon 12y ago
    We're actually planning on adding more video sources in the future. Stay tuned!
  • cainetighe 12y ago
    We originally prototyped videos with several providers including Vimeo, YouTube, and DailyMotion. Sadly there was an immediate (and difficult) safe search problem and we decided to table re-enabling the others until after we got some feedback about how it worked.
• Matt_Cutts 12y ago
  Hey Gabriel, congrats on the new launch! The new autocomplete -as-you-type feature made me curious: you mentioned that you don't associate queries with IP addresses, but does DDG save queries?
  • hjalle 12y ago
    Looks like an already asked question: To be clear, we still don't collect or share personal information and auto-suggest does not impact that at all. I appreciate it may make you and others uncomfortable and we're sensitive to that, but it is not a change in terms of privacy. We simply do not associate queries with personal information (e.g. IP addresses) and in fact don't store any of it at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7700960 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7700960
    • Matt_Cutts 12y ago
      I saw that, but it was very delicately worded. For example, if Gabe doesn't consider the search query to be personal information, then his answer would allow DDG to save/store search queries. That's why I asked for clarification.
• jbail 12y ago
  The Related Topics algorithm needs a lot work. I search for "Denver" and the top related topic is "Gang Activity in Denver." Really? I search for "Chicago" and the entire related topics list is places on the historic register in Chicago. Really? The whole list? I'd turn this off until you make it work better. It grabs a lot of attention and degrades the rest of the experience. My first impression is that if DDG gets that part so wrong, what else are they getting wrong with the search results? Cruel, perhaps, but that's my impression. The new interface is nice and fast otherwise.
• mring33621 12y ago
  Neither button in the "Learn More" dialog works for me. Left click, Chrome Version 34.0.1847.131 m, Win 7 64 bit
• dusklight 12y ago
  So understandably you don't want to be too specific about how you pick search results to beat the seo people, but could you talk briefly about how ddg returns results? Is it still some variant of PageRank?
• CmdrKrool 12y ago
  I can't turn off the infinite scroll. I've set "Auto-load" in the settings to Off. But when I scroll to the end of the page new links still get appended automatically. This also happens on the current version DDG as well. Am I misunderstanding this option?
  • yegg 12y ago
    What browser/OS?
    • CmdrKrool 12y ago
      Firefox 28 on Windows XP. My usual browser, loaded up with all kinds of extensions and stuff, so I also tried: Chrome 35.0.1912.2 (from portableapps.com) on Windows XP. So as to make sure it's not my fault for using XP, I went and updated my Arch Linux box and tried: Firefox 29.0 on Arch Linux Chromium 34.0.1847.132 on Arch Linux Both of those browsers are untouched by extensions. In every one of these cases, I go to duckduckgo.com or next.duckduckgo.com, go to the settings, change "Auto-load" to 'Off', type the test search "Rob Hubbard" into the search box at the top, press enter, scroll to the bottom of the page by dragging the scrollbar with the mouse, and see the text "More Links..." automatically change to some animated dots and then the further results appear a moment later. Hope all this detail is helpful!
• MicroBerto 12y ago
  Congrats on the launch! At what point will your business development team be ready to discuss integrating new spices? We have one coming that I think your team and users would like more than the existing one.
  • yegg 12y ago
    Right now! bd@duckduckgo.com
• crater 12y ago
  I think they did something good with the way (it seems) they standardized typing math equations. When you're searching some complicated integral with fractions and polynomials, you can pretty much put the spaces somewhere different every time in Google and get a different result. When I started typing an equation on DuckDuckGo I noticed that it automatically suggests a search with the spaces taken out of it. Also, I searched "Juicy J Acapellas" and was impressed because I found some sites that I enjoyed that I hadn't ever found before.
• alexman 12y ago
  Just because it lets me use "j" "k" to navigate the search results and "/" to highlight the search text is enough a temptation for me to contemplate dumping Google. I hate how Google forces me to press "Tab" and the up/down arrow keys to navigate.
• n3thin 12y ago
  Minor Nitpick!! You got the spelling wrong for promotions at https://next.duckduckgo.com/about?t=i&kd=-1 https://next.duckduckgo.com/about?t=i&kd=-1
• agazso 12y ago
  Scrolling is broken on Safari iOS7. The default behavior in Safari is when you scroll up, the controls appear (url bar, back/forward button, other tabs button etc.) It seems DDG implements its own scrolling, so scrolling up does not make the controls appear, which is quite unexpected and makes a bad user experience.
• ejain 12y ago
  I'd use it, if only I could get them to index my site...
• jan3er 12y ago
  About the top row showing About/Images/Videos etc. I would like to use my vertical scroll wheel to move to the left and right instead of having to travel with my mouse all the way to the corner to hit the red arrow-button.
• cyborgx7 12y ago
  Maybe it's just me but I find the hamburger menu in the top right , now that firefox has one of those themeselves in a similar place, kind of unpleasing. I also miss all the colours and I prefer when search buttons are actual buttons instead of an icon inside the text field.
• NewsReader42 12y ago
  The DDG team still cannot get the simple concept of seraching correct. We have had a website online for 3 years, every other major search engine finds and ranks it accordingly yet DDG doesn't even include it in their results. If they're missing our own website from results how many other websites are missing from results which ends up not giving the user the BEST choice of options when performing a search.
• morgangiraud 12y ago
  This is not very important but yet there are a few typos on https://next.duckduckgo.com/about https://next.duckduckgo.com/about "Less Clutter block" Our only focus is search. That means that our results are free of promotoions <-- "Discuss block" Our forums are a place -->for to<-- chat
• hrvbr 12y ago
  A search engine that doesn't track me shouldn't use Flash.
  • yegg 12y ago
    We don't -- where are you seeing flash?
• blueskin_ 12y ago
  Finally: A redesign that isn't a 'remove everything useful' one. That said, the low contrast text is a pain to read (still some metro-ification, I guess), the results page's information density is too low, and the scroll effect feels like I'm on the brink of getting motion sickness (something I've only ever experienced with javascript fake scroll, I might add)). Also, horizontal scrolling: Please, PLEASE, no. It's just horrible and should die.
• progamler 12y ago
  I like to see full links, that helps me to Validate the source and sort out webpages
• joeblau 12y ago
  I might switch back to this. Google is becoming more useless to me at it attempts to be everything to everybody else.
• dabrowski 12y ago
  Where is "Try this search on:" box that used to be on the right hand side? I found it extremely useful. Also the dropdown in search button that allowed to, say, sort the results by date. (I often forget query parameters) Overall I like the esthetic direction ddg is taking, unfortunately I found two good features missing.
• davidgerard 12y ago
  Introducing: awfulness.js http://tommorris.org/posts/2547 http://tommorris.org/posts/2547
• idealform01 12y ago
  I really like the new visual design, slick work! One issue I have is with the infinite scrolling of the results. When at the bottom of the page I would like to know how many more results there are so I am not flying blind until I randomly get to the end of the results. Not aware of any formal studies to support this just opinion :)
• prakashk 12y ago
  The "What is this?" link below Cloud Save buttons doesn't respond (Firefox 30.0a2 on Ubuntu 12.04). Right-click and Open Link in a New Tab results in a "403 Forbidden".
• jizzard 12y ago
  I use spacebar and shift+spacebar to scroll up and down pages. The floating header covers up part of the text so I never get a chance to read it.
• mstade 12y ago
  I tried switching to DuckDuckGo about 8 months ago, maybe a year, but eventually went back to using Google simply because DuckDuckGo's search results were not nearly relevant enough. When I saw this redesign I was compelled to give it another try, and I'm happy to say that the results are way better than they used to be. The new UI is also very comfortable, and brings most features up to par with Google, especially the image and video search. This is great work, and I'm very glad to now switch back to DuckDuckGo as my search engine of choice. Thanks!