Somebody can't stand to hear Google's name spoken negatively. Must come to their defense in forums. The world's biggest web advertiser is touched by such loyalty. It will be rewarded with the Spin Doctor Medal of Honor.
As valiant as DuckDuckGo wants to portray themselves, the strong pulls of free-market capitalism will have them eating their foot sooner than later.
One (i.e., a corporation in the USA) can never, ever, ever deny the undeniable force that places a return on investment above all else. You can sugarcoat it with cute little aphorisms and anecdotes or any other thing Ben Franklin uttered many scores ago, but to assume you (i.e., said corporation in the USA) can ignore the cries of those outside your door demanding to know why $1 isn't turning into $2 is naïve at best, downright criminal at worst.
I am proud of you DuckDuckGo. But altruism doesn't work in corporate America. It just doesn't. And when it does, it's because it's riding on a float made out of money.
"It is a myth that you need to track people to make money in Web search" - totally agree, I do most of my shopping over internet and otherwise use internet to research the items I will buy at the store, and it's very ridiculous to see ads for the items that I bought months ago, which I won't buy again in foreseeable future, showing up at every ad-supported site I visit. I mean the probability of me buying a randomly selected item is higher than me buying something that I already just bought (like another refrigerator?) so the only place where ads are effective is directly in the search results for a specific item I did a search for, and that doesn't require any tracking overhead. Tracking just makes things much creepier.
Somebody can't stand to hear Google's name spoken negatively. Must come to their defense in forums. The world's biggest web advertiser is touched by such loyalty. It will be rewarded with the Spin Doctor Medal of Honor.
As I'll assume you were referring to me I guess I shouldn't be surprised if you ignore the times I too post negative Google comments, despite no shortfall of them here already. The difference is I do make an attempt to be accurate about it.
Some here can't be bothered with fact-checking or research, and the subject of Google attracts more daily FUD here than other topics. You and others think it important to aggressively attack the Apple FUD in the search for truth, but competitors not so much. I find that surprising considering the obvious education and raw intelligence that most members here demonstrate in other subjects. I would be surprised if you personally find ignorance of the facts an acceptable excuse for writing FUD. Research ain't that hard.
If it's worth posting it should be worth posting accurately, don't you agree?
As valiant as DuckDuckGo wants to portray themselves, the strong pulls of free-market capitalism will have them eating their foot sooner than later.
One (i.e., a corporation in the USA) can never, ever, ever deny the undeniable force that places a return on investment above all else. You can sugarcoat it with cute little aphorisms and anecdotes or any other thing Ben Franklin uttered many scores ago, but to assume you (i.e., said corporation in the USA) can ignore the cries of those outside your door demanding to know why $1 isn't turning into $2 is naïve at best, downright criminal at worst.
I am proud of you DuckDuckGo. But altruism doesn't work in corporate America. It just doesn't. And when it does, it's because it's riding on a float made out of money.
That's not at all true. A smaller business, and even large ones, actually (even an incorporated in America one) does not have to listen to those forces. It's not as hard as you think, as long as you have the right people.
Nothing wrong with taking more than a $ billion annually of Google's money. Just like people say Apple should ditch Samsung, but every year they buy tons of chips and screens from them because it makes financial sense. Same thing with Google as the default.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slprescott
Apple may want to continue paying Microsoft for Bing so that Microsoft continue making money from the iOS ecosystem.
I think it is the other way around. When you do a Siri search, Bing has an opportunity to display their ads, therefore Bing pays Apple for that privilege.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike1
I changed the default to Bing a long time ago. At least I get $5 gift cards from them every month or so.
That is what people should do. Change the search engine to whatever you like and let Google continue to pay more than a $ billion per year to be the default in Safari.
If Apple were to buy DDG and make it default they would need to work on it to make it a true competitor to Google, Yahoo and Bing, otherwise it would probably be a net loss of revenue compared to the current deal with Google.
The specifics on what Google does when it tracks you. Worth reading, if you are not familiar with the specifics. And yes, search and advertising are connected to you, even if you never sign in.
DDG has been my go-to for a couple of years now, in all circumstances (US), and I have been satisfied. I think I went back to Googs once, but it didn't show me anything significantly different than I'd found in DDG.
The specifics on what Google does when it tracks you. Worth reading, if you are not familiar with the specifics. And yes, search and advertising are connected to you, even if you never sign in.
If Google knows so much about everyone, where they live, who they know, what they do and even where they are going and why. It shouldn't be so difficult for them to identify potential mass murders and alert the authorities in advance.
As valiant as DuckDuckGo wants to portray themselves, the strong pulls of free-market capitalism will have them eating their foot sooner than later.
One (i.e., a corporation in the USA) can never, ever, ever deny the undeniable force that places a return on investment above all else. You can sugarcoat it with cute little aphorisms and anecdotes or any other thing Ben Franklin uttered many scores ago, but to assume you (i.e., said corporation in the USA) can ignore the cries of those outside your door demanding to know why $1 isn't turning into $2 is naïve at best, downright criminal at worst.
I am proud of you DuckDuckGo. But altruism doesn't work in corporate America. It just doesn't. And when it does, it's because it's riding on a float made out of money.
Spoken exactly like Alec Baldwin of the Film Actor's Guild.
I get that DDG isn't as powerful, but 95% of my searches are pretty darn basic, so it works for me as it would for most people, at least stateside. With all these search engines (and maps), the more people use it the smarter it gets, so might as well use it when you can. There might be more technical, foreign or academic queries where DDG wouldn't cut it, yet.
And for those times when DDG's own results don't yield fruit, try using a g! before your search terms and it will automatically do an encrypted search thru google, b! for bing and y! for yahoo.
And for those times when DDG's own results don't yield fruit, try using a g! before your search terms and it will automatically do an encrypted search thru google, b! for bing and y! for yahoo.
How so? It's the same searched I'd be making using any other search engine.
Because you can't earn rewards by being anonymous.
From Bing Rewards: "To redeem credits, you must provide your true first and last name, and submit an accurate mailing address, working phone number (VOIP numbers aren't permitted), and email address", none of which is required to use Google Search.
DDG has been my go-to for a couple of years now, in all circumstances (US), and I have been satisfied. I think I went back to Googs once, but it didn't show me anything significantly different than I'd found in DDG.
Duck Duck Go works just fine on my desktop and phone. I like being able to support them without feeling like I'm taking a hit in the process.
For simple searches yes. So it's my default.
Quote:
Originally Posted by igxqrrl
I like DDG, I use DDG and have been for years, but about 50% of the time I wind up having to search with google because DDG's search quality just isn't that good yet. It's like the Apple Maps of search. So close, but far enough from 'good' that you can't quite abandon the big G yet.
Which is why DDG's "bangs!" feature is so useful. Without changing my default engine, just add "!g" to the search term and you'll get Google's results for the same term.
(And there are thousands of other "bangs!" - one of DDG's best features. Just look for info on them on their site.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon
That actually has nothing to do with search algorerhythm quality, and everything to do with the database Google has built up on you. They serve you results you're more likely to want, so you think it's better, and then are more likely to keep using it, feeding the pig even more.
That may be part of it, but I basically disagree. For complex or obscure searches on things I've never searched for (or bought) adding "!g" generally brings up much richer and more accurate results.
I like DDG, I use DDG and have been for years, but about 50% of the time I wind up having to search with google because DDG's search quality just isn't that good yet. It's like the Apple Maps of search. So close, but far enough from 'good' that you can't quite abandon the big G yet.
This is me as well. DDG is my default search engine and it works fine most of the time but sometimes I still resort to Google. I wouldn't say I need Google 50% of the time, but I tend to use it when I want to do a string based search rather than just a keyword or a handful of keywords. Google definitely does a better job parsing strings to find what you're after.
Which is why DDG's "bangs!" feature is so useful. Without changing my default engine, just add "!g" to the search term and you'll get Google's results for the same term.
(And there are thousands of other "bangs!" - one of DDG's best features. Just look for info on them on their site.)
That may be part of it, but I basically disagree. For complex or obscure searches on things I've never searched for (or bought) adding "!g" generally brings up much richer and more accurate results.
Wow I had no idea you could do this. Thank you so much this will save me a ton of visits to Google's main page!
Comments
If Apple does acquire them I'm sure they'll change the name and it won't be AppleSearch either.
Though as time passes I'm starting to think Apple won't make a webpage search engine but something far more advanced and innovative.
I'm thinking Apple Search is already here. It's called Siri
As valiant as DuckDuckGo wants to portray themselves, the strong pulls of free-market capitalism will have them eating their foot sooner than later.
One (i.e., a corporation in the USA) can never, ever, ever deny the undeniable force that places a return on investment above all else. You can sugarcoat it with cute little aphorisms and anecdotes or any other thing Ben Franklin uttered many scores ago, but to assume you (i.e., said corporation in the USA) can ignore the cries of those outside your door demanding to know why $1 isn't turning into $2 is naïve at best, downright criminal at worst.
I am proud of you DuckDuckGo. But altruism doesn't work in corporate America. It just doesn't. And when it does, it's because it's riding on a float made out of money.
Some here can't be bothered with fact-checking or research, and the subject of Google attracts more daily FUD here than other topics. You and others think it important to aggressively attack the Apple FUD in the search for truth, but competitors not so much. I find that surprising considering the obvious education and raw intelligence that most members here demonstrate in other subjects. I would be surprised if you personally find ignorance of the facts an acceptable excuse for writing FUD. Research ain't that hard.
If it's worth posting it should be worth posting accurately, don't you agree?
As valiant as DuckDuckGo wants to portray themselves, the strong pulls of free-market capitalism will have them eating their foot sooner than later.
One (i.e., a corporation in the USA) can never, ever, ever deny the undeniable force that places a return on investment above all else. You can sugarcoat it with cute little aphorisms and anecdotes or any other thing Ben Franklin uttered many scores ago, but to assume you (i.e., said corporation in the USA) can ignore the cries of those outside your door demanding to know why $1 isn't turning into $2 is naïve at best, downright criminal at worst.
I am proud of you DuckDuckGo. But altruism doesn't work in corporate America. It just doesn't. And when it does, it's because it's riding on a float made out of money.
That's not at all true. A smaller business, and even large ones, actually (even an incorporated in America one) does not have to listen to those forces. It's not as hard as you think, as long as you have the right people.
Remove Google as the default Search for Safari
Nothing wrong with taking more than a $ billion annually of Google's money. Just like people say Apple should ditch Samsung, but every year they buy tons of chips and screens from them because it makes financial sense. Same thing with Google as the default.
Apple may want to continue paying Microsoft for Bing so that Microsoft continue making money from the iOS ecosystem.
I think it is the other way around. When you do a Siri search, Bing has an opportunity to display their ads, therefore Bing pays Apple for that privilege.
I changed the default to Bing a long time ago. At least I get $5 gift cards from them every month or so.
That is what people should do. Change the search engine to whatever you like and let Google continue to pay more than a $ billion per year to be the default in Safari.
If Apple were to buy DDG and make it default they would need to work on it to make it a true competitor to Google, Yahoo and Bing, otherwise it would probably be a net loss of revenue compared to the current deal with Google.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2013/05/10/15-ways-google-monitors-you
I really don't like their name.
Unhappy childhood, perhaps?
DDG has been my go-to for a couple of years now, in all circumstances (US), and I have been satisfied. I think I went back to Googs once, but it didn't show me anything significantly different than I'd found in DDG.
The specifics on what Google does when it tracks you. Worth reading, if you are not familiar with the specifics. And yes, search and advertising are connected to you, even if you never sign in.
If Google knows so much about everyone, where they live, who they know, what they do and even where they are going and why. It shouldn't be so difficult for them to identify potential mass murders and alert the authorities in advance.
As valiant as DuckDuckGo wants to portray themselves, the strong pulls of free-market capitalism will have them eating their foot sooner than later.
One (i.e., a corporation in the USA) can never, ever, ever deny the undeniable force that places a return on investment above all else. You can sugarcoat it with cute little aphorisms and anecdotes or any other thing Ben Franklin uttered many scores ago, but to assume you (i.e., said corporation in the USA) can ignore the cries of those outside your door demanding to know why $1 isn't turning into $2 is naïve at best, downright criminal at worst.
I am proud of you DuckDuckGo. But altruism doesn't work in corporate America. It just doesn't. And when it does, it's because it's riding on a float made out of money.
Spoken exactly like Alec Baldwin of the Film Actor's Guild.
I get that DDG isn't as powerful, but 95% of my searches are pretty darn basic, so it works for me as it would for most people, at least stateside. With all these search engines (and maps), the more people use it the smarter it gets, so might as well use it when you can. There might be more technical, foreign or academic queries where DDG wouldn't cut it, yet.
And for those times when DDG's own results don't yield fruit, try using a g! before your search terms and it will automatically do an encrypted search thru google, b! for bing and y! for yahoo.
And for those times when DDG's own results don't yield fruit, try using a g! before your search terms and it will automatically do an encrypted search thru google, b! for bing and y! for yahoo.
Good tips.
Wow. You're heavily tracked then, and more personally identifiable than via Google as a a rule.
How so? It's the same searched I'd be making using any other search engine.
From Bing Rewards: "To redeem credits, you must provide your true first and last name, and submit an accurate mailing address, working phone number (VOIP numbers aren't permitted), and email address", none of which is required to use Google Search.
And here you are abbreviating DUCKDUCKGO. smh.
Duck Duck Go works just fine on my desktop and phone. I like being able to support them without feeling like I'm taking a hit in the process.
For simple searches yes. So it's my default.
I like DDG, I use DDG and have been for years, but about 50% of the time I wind up having to search with google because DDG's search quality just isn't that good yet. It's like the Apple Maps of search. So close, but far enough from 'good' that you can't quite abandon the big G yet.
Which is why DDG's "bangs!" feature is so useful. Without changing my default engine, just add "!g" to the search term and you'll get Google's results for the same term.
(And there are thousands of other "bangs!" - one of DDG's best features. Just look for info on them on their site.)
That actually has nothing to do with search algorerhythm quality, and everything to do with the database Google has built up on you. They serve you results you're more likely to want, so you think it's better, and then are more likely to keep using it, feeding the pig even more.
That may be part of it, but I basically disagree. For complex or obscure searches on things I've never searched for (or bought) adding "!g" generally brings up much richer and more accurate results.
I like DDG, I use DDG and have been for years, but about 50% of the time I wind up having to search with google because DDG's search quality just isn't that good yet. It's like the Apple Maps of search. So close, but far enough from 'good' that you can't quite abandon the big G yet.
This is me as well. DDG is my default search engine and it works fine most of the time but sometimes I still resort to Google. I wouldn't say I need Google 50% of the time, but I tend to use it when I want to do a string based search rather than just a keyword or a handful of keywords. Google definitely does a better job parsing strings to find what you're after.
Which is why DDG's "bangs!" feature is so useful. Without changing my default engine, just add "!g" to the search term and you'll get Google's results for the same term.
(And there are thousands of other "bangs!" - one of DDG's best features. Just look for info on them on their site.)
That may be part of it, but I basically disagree. For complex or obscure searches on things I've never searched for (or bought) adding "!g" generally brings up much richer and more accurate results.
Wow I had no idea you could do this. Thank you so much this will save me a ton of visits to Google's main page!