
I ditched Google for DuckDuckGo - dsr12
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/duckduckgo-google-alternative-search-privacy
======
smabie
The problem is that a lot of what I search for isn’t boring and obvious:
searching about quantitative finance, stack traces, economics, and some math
equations or theorems. Of course there’s the common stuff as well: what movies
to watch in a specific genre, video game reviews, etc. But while both ddg and
google do a reasonable job on the latter, they both fail hard for the former,
ddg more than google though:

ddg has never given me good results for technical topics. Google used to, but
I feel like they changed something. Now google just regurgitates the same top
sites over and over again, very rarely if ever displaying less popular sources
like forums or a professor’s website or papers. In fact a lot of the time,
google decides it wants to search for some other thing than I tell it because
I must have made a mistake searching for something that not very many other
people search for. IMO, the apex of google search was around 2010-2013.

~~~
Scoundreller
Google loves to ignore search words nowadays. Even quotes won’t force it. Ugh.

At least they’ve added « Must Include » options sometimes.

~~~
copperx
I've never fully understood why Google hasn't provided an advanced search
option. Even the most primitive library catalogs have one. Sure, there are a
few options you can use, but they're extremely basic.

Is it because it would reveal key parts of the algorithm? Or is it a stance
(i.e., a standard Google search ought to be enough for everybody)?.

~~~
jshmrsn
There’s a decent amount of advanced search operators. Are you looking for
something else? [https://moz.com/learn/seo/search-
operators](https://moz.com/learn/seo/search-operators)

------
oefrha
Here’s one problem I have with DuckDuckGo.

I know DuckDuckGo have acquired the domain duck.com. Occasionally after an
unfruitful Google search I would think, maybe I should give DDG a try. Since
duck.com is easier to type than duckduckgo.com, I would visit duck.com. But
duck.com would direct me to a stupid landing page that asks me to “Add
DuckDuckGo to ...” or “Install DuckDuckGo” on iOS. There’s a teeny tiny “or
try a private search first” line at the very bottom where I can click to
reveal the search box. What the hell? The landing page makes me 300% more
likely to just leave, instead of adding or installing it.

You can try it yourself: [https://duck.com](https://duck.com)

(Btw, almost every time I land on Quora, that post by DDG CEO shows up as
promoted. Kinda tired by now.)

Edit: To be fair to them, I noticed only just now that the box could be
dismissed with a close button or clicking anywhere outside, so clicking on “or
try a private search first” isn’t the only way. However, in my defense, the
close button blends pretty well into the image, and being able to click
outside is unclear since unlike modals elsewhere, there’s absolutely nothing
behind.

I still fail to see why they have to hide the search box.

~~~
hdivider
Why not use ddg.gg? Even shorter.

~~~
oefrha
TIL. The point still stands.

Edit: Wow, this one downvoted to negative. Guess I pissed off a few true
believers. You may argue why the point doesn’t stand, instead of just
downvoting, or, say, giving me a helpful and condescending primer on switching
search engine.

Anyway, I don’t harbor ill feelings toward DDG. I’m pointing this out because
I think the dark pattern here will genuinely hurt adoption, even if to a
minuscule extent.

~~~
hdivider
Yes, I agree. They shouldn't force people to dismiss some popup.

------
mattlondon
Quite a lot of negative comments here.

I've been using DDG as my primary search engine for ages now - perhaps years
now? It has been great - very refreshing, no filter bubble (that I can see).

I still end up doing !g maybe 3 or 4 times a week when struggling to find
something, but often I can't find what I want on google either. On the whole,
I generally really recommend it. I still use google as my primary at work and
I cant say I notice the difference in the results quality (technical or
region).

My main criticism is that the "products" search seems to basically be an
"Amazon search" where as Google Shopping is actually quite useful when trying
to find a retailer, and some of their search widget things (e.g. currency
conversion) are pretty basic compared to the richer ones Google has.

------
bhauer
Am I alone in that I don't speak of using a search engine as strictly binary
behavior? Sure, I have long avoided using Google for the bulk of my search
queries. I use Bing, DuckDuckGo, and others at times. But I still use Google
for some queries, especially when I want information from the past 24 hours
(limiting the search to updates from today), since it seems Google's indexers
run more frequently.

So when people say they wholly moved from search engine A to B, I am
suspicious. And when the counter-argument is, "but the problem is A is better
than B on query X," I think, "of course, and you might keep using A for X,
while using B for other things."

This isn't (yet?) your operating system or where you live. It's just a web
site you are selecting in the moment to provide a service. You can use a
different web site for much the same service the very next moment.

I personally just have bookmarks set up so that "b [query]" is a bing search,
"d [query]" is a DDG search, and "g [query]" is a Google search. Further, "m
[query]" searches MDN, "s [query]" searches SO, etc.

------
dudus
I don't care!

I've seen this in HN a million times before. Someone ditches Google or
Facebook and proceed to tell you why they made that decision and how. I don't
care!

This feels like the new Instagram food pics. I don't care!

But I feel alone here. Like how every time this same topic gets posted
hundreds of comments validate it. Saying how this is too hard because Google
is an evil monopoly or how it's not too hard because a random person also did
it, and then proceeds to tell you a better way to ditch the evil corps. I
don't care!

Am I crazy? Are all online communities destined to become an echo chamber
pushing incessantly the same ideas and types of news?

At this point I wish I could drop Hacker News and replace with something less
evil. Maybe I'll write an article on Wired when I do it.

~~~
CamelCaseName
I'm also frustrated with these threads and believe they violate HN's
guidelines.

As per the guidelines, articles on-topic if they "gratify one's intellectual
curiosity". [0] Yet these are so often rehashed arguments attached to a
personal anecdote!

Personal stories of leaving Google search for DDG, Chrome for Brave, etc. are
countless, and I can't see what ideas could be presented that are novel or
stimulating.

The comments are always exactly the same as well!

[0]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

~~~
computerex
I think that's being unfair and a rather misclassification of the HackerNews
guidelines. I don't think this violates the guidelines at all, and I think
it'd be very difficult, if not impossible, for you to prove that this post
does not "gratify one's intellectual curiosity". This isn't merely a meme,
it's a well reasoned and though out post. Personally I found it intellectually
gratifying and I liked it.

------
packet_nerd
I want a browser extension (or native feature) that searches several engines
at once and display's the results side-by-side. Sort of like this:

    
    
        +-------------------------------+
        | Search string                 |
        +---------+----------+----------+
        |         |          |          |
        | Bing    | DDG      | Google   |
        |         |          |          |
        | Hit 1   | Hit 1    | Hit 1    |
        |         |          |          |
        | Hit 2   | Hit 2    | Hit 2    |
        |         |          |          |
        | Hit 3   | Hit 3    | Hit 3    |
        |         |          |          |
        +---------+----------+----------+
    

And I want to be able to pull it up instantly with a keyboard shortcut.

The extension would need to be smart enough to de-duplicate hits across the
different engines.

Finally, I really REALLY want to pay for the search engines themselves (make
it a subscription at $50/m or something), because then I know their incentives
are aligned with my needs rather than with their ad business's needs.

I don't think any of the search engines have search API's? Maybe they could
make API access a paid feature.

~~~
brantonb
Years ago, Microsoft built an internal site that showed Bing side-by-side with
Google. Employees were encouraged to use it and report when Microsoft’s
results were worse than Google’s. It got employees to actually use Bing, sent
feedback to the team, and gave employees easy access to better search results
when Microsoft’s didn’t suffice. It was pretty great.

Note: this was before Bing branding, but I forget the exact branding of the
time.

~~~
Fnoord
Live Search? [1] I remember Microsoft heavily trying to build on this
Live(.com) branding. Or was it still MSN Search?

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bing_(search_engine)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bing_\(search_engine\))

------
old-gregg
There are other reasons to switch:

\- Google's blatant Youtube spam in search results. They no longer keep them
in the "video" tab. It's becoming increasingly difficult to keep YouTube out.

\- Better UX: no sticky headers, clean output without random stuff injected
into your search results, which is especially annoying on mobile.

\- Image search actually can be used for image search, i.e. I am not forced to
visit pages of images, when I need an image URL.

Basically, DDG looks like Google circa 2005 which is a good thing.

~~~
Scoundreller
> \- Image search actually can be used for image search, i.e. I am not forced
> to visit pages of images, when I need an image URL.

I think they lost a copyright lawsuit over that one.

~~~
Qub3d
Correct, Getty Images sued them:

[https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/02/internet-rages-
after...](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/02/internet-rages-after-google-
removes-view-image-button-bowing-to-getty/)

------
CGamesPlay
I switched back to Google after using DuckDuckGo for a few months. The reason
I switched back was because DDG was slow! I found myself waiting for DDG when
I was running all of my silly currency conversion search queries, and didn't
have the same problem with Google. (I'm located in Europe.)

[append]

To address some of the comments below, the slowness I'm talking about is
probably P80-ish. Most queries run fine, but I was noticing throughout the day
that some queries would randomly take multiple seconds to resolve. I never
timed them, because just re-running the queries would work around the issue,
so I suspect it's some backend thing on DDG's side. Google does have similar
issues for me, but it feels more like P99-level.

~~~
Nextgrid
I agree, DDG is slow. Not slow enough to make me switch but still quite
annoying.

~~~
tempguy9999
I searched for something arbitrary (the word "omnipotent") and it came back in
about 2 seconds. What are you getting?

~~~
Nextgrid
My point is that Google is faster at displaying a page, even if the results
are loaded in Javascript after the initial page is displayed.

The results take the same time to appear, but Google _feels_ faster than DDG.

------
wyck
Google Search / Youtube really push the MSM into the top results, it's really
not what I'm looking for.

DDG results are meoicre.

It's weird when you can say internet search has devolved.

~~~
wyxuan
It's almost like mainstream media is what people click on and is <gasp>
mainstream. Of course you are doing to have them higher up in the search
rankings

~~~
lurchpop
No they intentionally put those sources higher in the results even when
there’s more popular content below it. They get extra priority as they’re
deemed “authoritative sources.” So if you’re searching something political
you’ll get a Washington Consensus result every time pretty literally. If you
search names of recent mideast wars, CFR appears to be a preprogrammed result
like Wikipedia.

~~~
wyxuan
You don't necessarily know that source for CFR is necessarily less popular
than Wikipedia: plus CFR is not necessarily Washington consensus. In addition
to that it's much better to have informed discussion on a topic rather than
some misleading news source.

------
utopcell
> It’s not a fair fight, but it is one, oddly, where the small guy can
> compete. It might seem ludicrous – DuckDuckGo has 78 employees and Google
> 114,096 – but often the outcome is the same. For the majority of your
> searches David, it turns out, is just as good as Goliath.

It has been repeated ad-nausea: duckduckgo's organic results are taken
directly from Bing.

------
thiht
I regularly try DDG because I desperately want to quit Google for good. But
everytime, it's just a huge time waster.

Let's take an example, here is the result of the last actual query I made in
DDG: "dig show all":
[https://i.imgur.com/AccN8WJ.png](https://i.imgur.com/AccN8WJ.png)

Now, in Google:
[https://i.imgur.com/KLjKfYu.png](https://i.imgur.com/KLjKfYu.png)

This is just ridiculous. I end up using !g or !s (StartPage) for almost all my
queries...

~~~
throwaway286
my DDG results for "dig show all" are much better than yours. try changing the
"France" region to "All Regions" in the dropdown below the query.

~~~
thiht
"All regions" was already checked (even though it displayed France).

However I tried checking United States, and results are indeed better. I will
try that :)

------
vzaliva
I do not use DuckDuckGo since they announced that they partnered with
Yandex.ru. I do not want my searches going to Russia, even anonymized.

[https://www.reddit.com/r/duckduckgo/comments/a7nl1v/duckduck...](https://www.reddit.com/r/duckduckgo/comments/a7nl1v/duckduckgos_relationship_to_yandex/)

This is based on my political views. YMMV.

------
neals
I switched back because technical questions lead to much more general websites
then Google. Google usually points to better stackoverflow-pages.

Though I have hear the opposite from others. Not sure what's up with that.

~~~
lordgrenville
DDG excerpts the top-rated accepted SO answer, which is a huge timesaver for
me (when it's accurate) - great when searching for a snippet I never quite
remember like `flatten nested list python`. Although I'd imagine it's probably
an IP infringement, which is why Google doesn't do it, so maybe it won't last.

~~~
saagarjha
> Although I'd imagine it's probably an IP infringement

Content on Stack Overflow is CC BY-SA 4.0. It’s arguable whether DuckDuckGo
shows enough information to consist attribution, but this isn’t generally
impossible to do.

------
akmarinov
Also switched to DDG, while great for English, its localization is horrible.

My native language’s alphabet is Cyrillic and whenever I search for anything,
I always get results in Russian, even though I’m not from Russia.

------
therealmarv
DDG is still bad for

* Languages other than English

* Regional search

not everybody is living in the USA. DDG simply does not work good enough in a
global world!

------
sethammons
I recently switched from Chrome to FireFox and moved my default search engine
to DuckDuckGo. I've been disappointed with both, but am holding out still.

For DuckDuckGo, like others have noted, it is really poor at technical
results. I thought Google was bad before, but now I almost always have to
switch back. It does seem to "feel" slower than Google, but that could just be
FireFox. I've also come to really enjoy two things that Google does: the
weather graph where I can easily see the multi-day forecast and easily see
precipitation chances _throughout_ the day, and I like that I can watch the
day's trends on a given stock.

For FireFox, I have had it stop being able to log into _any_ site on mobile
for Android, so I had to re-install it. A few times a week, the browser
completely locks up in Mac. I can drag the window, but I cannot interact with
any tabs. I have to kill it and restore. It feels slower much of the time.
Also, on mobile, it is more finicky on clicking. Example, on HN on mobile, I
have to zoom to click the collapse/expand and up/downvotes. I did not have to
do that in Chrome. I do like that it is more privacy focused and I like the
scrolling tabs compared to Chrome's continually smaller and smaller tabs.

I'll keep with it on both fronts, but it has felt like a step backward for the
most part.

~~~
jhoechtl
For firefox on Mac they made an important milestone three weeks ago in that
performance got increased while power consumption was reduced. Are you using
the latest version?

If mobile means Android you should give Firefox Preview a shot, a whole new
experience.

------
Mathnerd314
DuckDuckGo is a little less powerful for some types of searches. Its date
filter doesn't let you specify custom dates, the autocorrect behavior is some
sort of bug
([https://help.duckduckgo.com/results/autocorrect/](https://help.duckduckgo.com/results/autocorrect/)),
local businesses get lost amongst many others, etc. For example searching with
"+goats" finds the author's movie, but the default search and the suggested
correction of quoting goats don't:
[https://duckduckgo.com/?q=film+leonardo+dicaprio+%2Bgoats+sc...](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=film+leonardo+dicaprio+%2Bgoats+scene&t=ffab&ia=videos)
OTOH searching on Google doesn't find the scene for me either; I suspect it
only succeeded for the author because Google knew he'd seen that movie.

DDG's index of web pages seems bigger. The index isn't as up-to-date on
popular sites, but many obscure sites (e.g. my blog) show up in DDG and not in
Google. But then Google indexes more PDFs.

------
dredmorbius
My own permanent switch to DuckDuckGo came in 2013 (with a few previous false
starts). Relevance during that period seemed to escallate rapidly.

Mostly: DDG is just a fantastic time-saver. Bang searches from the navigation
bar, URLs directly in the SERP, no Google ad spam pushing organic search well
below the fold, images accessible from the image page, and of course, no
bubbling or tracking.

Yes, occasionally I need to offer slightly more specificity in my searches,
which really isn't a challenge.

And yes, the list of shortcomings I'd made on HN in 2014 still largely apply:
ranged-date searches, specific media collections (scientific articles, books),
and specific Google tools (ngrams, trends) have me going off DDG. But those
are much as HN searches (!hn), Wikipedia (!w), or the online etymological
dictionary (!etym) a bang away (!gbooks, !trends, !ngrams).

Technical search quality is as good or better than Google at this point.

Archive collection, notably in older content, occasionally weaker.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7040695](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7040695)

------
maaaats
Switched last week. Fed up by how Google gives a 90s-looking wap site when
using Firefox for Android. I added an extension that switches my user agent
just for google.com to get around it, but instead most results are then AMP
links. And opening AMP-links hosted on google in firefox gives you a page that
you cannot scroll.

Almost wonder if they're doing it on purpose.

Haven't used ddg long enough to comment on the quality. But at least google
for Norwegian results have declined lately. Many results are just machine-
translated spam on autogenerated blogs.

For instance, last week I googled "pes anserinus bursitt", and one of the top
results is [http://](http://) bumyjaki .tk/arrestere/pes-anserinus-
bursitt.html (don't open it). The preview is broken Norwegian, and clicking it
I get popovers saying I've won stuff, and firefox asks if I want to enable
vibration, and I'm instantly redirected to more spam. How the f is that so
high, google? And it's prominent on lots of stuff I search.

~~~
mbrukman
Hi Mats (or do you prefer Matsemann?),

I am an engineer on Google Search.

Sorry to hear about your experiences; I would like to better understand the
issues that you're seeing and reproduce them on my end, so that I can file
detailed bug reports for the folks working on those features. I would
appreciate your help if you're open to that.

First, I compared Firefox on Android with Chrome on Android for a few queries
and they seem to get very similar results (but we are likely using different
queries). Would you be able to provide some sample queries where Firefox was
receiving the results that led you to change its user agent and get different
results?

I also visited several AMP pages on Firefox from Google search results (Reddit
and BBC) and they were all scrollable, so it's likely that we're looking at
different sites as well. Can you tell me which sites' AMP pages were non-
scrollable for you?

Regarding the poor results for Norwegian searches: I wasn't getting the
problematic URL for this query; will try reproducing this again later. If you
have any other search queries for which the Norwegian results are bad (or have
been declining in quality over time), if you're able, please share them with
me as well: either here, or if you prefer, you can find me on Twitter and
LinkedIn.

Thanks in advance!

------
sodosopa
I still have problems with DDG. I can usually find what I need within 1-2
pages on Google. With DDG sometimes it’s further in.

------
jader201
It seems be becoming very common that every article about some individual
writing a blog about dropping Google for DDG makes it to the front page, with
the comments sharing the same anecdotes about either why they do/don’t, with
nothing else new really being shared.

Advocacy is great but nothing new is discussed really.

------
Cougher
The article includes some of the reasons why I changed to DDG quite a while
ago, but this is pretty odd:

"When you realise that most things you search for online are really boring and
obvious, you soon realise you don't really need Google in your life"

How is this an argument to use one search engine over another? Whether it's
boring and obvious or not, you're still using a search engine. I stopped using
Google because I was tired of landing on sites that seemed to be chosen by
Google rather than finding the types of sites that I was looking for. Not that
I'm entirely satisfied with DDG, either. I'm very tired of typing in keywords
only to have them ignored.

Side rant: I'm so tired of these headlines being phrased as if they're
assuming that "we've all been doing this wrong" or "I did this so you should
too".

------
finnmagic
A big problem for DuckDuckGo image searching — I can only access the image
file, but no option to go to the webpage that links the file. Most of the
time, the image is stored on a different hosting site. I find myself often
using google image search instead, for this reason.

~~~
monetus
When I click the url of the site, rather then the view file button, I am
directed to the site? What os/browser are you using, if you don't mind my
asking?

~~~
finnmagic
Omg I can’t believe I missed that! iOS/Safari puts it there, but then hides it
rather quickly. Embarrassing how much time I could have saved. Thanks buddy!

------
tonyedgecombe
I just switched back, quite a lot of my searches are regional and DDG sucks
for that (in the UK).

~~~
knolan
The regional search in DDG is awful. I usually have to add the country to the
search as well has enabling the toggle for it to work somewhat reliably.

That said, I do 99% or my searching on DDG.

------
jschwartzi
I’ve been using DDG on all my devices for work and for personal use for almost
a year now. I’ve searched for error messages songs and tons of other stuff.
Initially I was having trouble getting results. There seemed to be a whole
skill to writing good search queries that had atrophied in me during the
Google era. I’ve had to pay more attention to quotes and change queries
sometimes but it’s never been impossible to find the information i’m looking
for. And it’s nice to be free of the all-seeing eye of Google. DDG may not
give perfect results initially but it’s good enough for me.

------
beefield
Don't know if it is Europe vs US thing, but I have been more happy with
Qwant.com than ddg.gg.

(And to add one of my pet peeves: why _none_ of the search engines let me
easily blacklist domains from my results?)

------
purple-again
I tried it for awhile and had to go back to google. I type in “relevant error
message stackoverflow” and NO WHERE in the first three pages of results can I
find the same stack overflow post that’s purple from my 20 visits over the
last 5 years because I just can’t memorize everything. I google the same thing
and it’s top results every time. I don’t understand search so it could easily
be personalized results remembering what I looked at but it doesn’t matter.
What matters is it just works and DDG didn’t.

~~~
erikbye
If you want results from SO, why not use the search on their site?

It also sounds like maybe you should search your browser's history instead, if
you're looking for previously visited pages.

------
dilawar
I mostly use DDG but often switch to google whenever DDG does not return
'good' results. Especially on tech topics and literature search Google results
are far superior.

~~~
Semaphor
No problems with DDG on tech topics unless it’s a somewhat rare error message.

~~~
bogwog
Same. A lot of people here are saying they have issues with it, but I find it
hard to believe that they gave it a fair chance. Probably just did a handful
of searches before giving up on it entirely.

I've been using DDG for a few years now, and very rarely do I find that I need
to go to Google.

------
wyxuan
TBH, there knowledge cards that ddg shows are significantly inferior compared
to Google, and sometimes ddg is just worse in terms of research. Thank
goodness for the Google bang.

------
jhoechtl
Rephrasing: I ditched Google for a wrapper over mostly Bing with some handy
shortcuts. And uh, they do not track me as agresseively but mostly because
they can't.

------
bla3
Here's the usual reminder that DDG results are basically Bing's with minor
tweaks. You're not supporting an independent index if you use DDG.

------
ur-whale
I wish this was actually possible, but, as much as I dislike Google as a
company, the quality gap just makes the switch impossible.

------
snailmailman
I've been using DDG almost exclusively for quite a while now. I _love_ the
bangs feature, frequently using !w for wikipedia, and !wa for wolfram-alpha,
along with several others.

I always see anecdotes from people who use !g a lot. I guess thats never a
habit I got into. Maybe i can just never tell when my search has given "bad"
results, but I've never felt like something was missing. I don't think I've
purposefully done a google search for quite some time now.

The last few times I have done a google search, (mainly on systems that still
have google as the default) I have gotten almost exclusively AMP pages as the
results. I _never_ see this with DDG and its given me a reason to stay away
from google.

Interestingly one of the ways i still end up on google is the "spotlight
search", or whatever the system search is called on iOS. It occasionally has a
"show google results" button, separate from the "search web" button. It only
ever appears sometimes, and its weird that its ever there at all considering
DDG is my default search in Safari. When it is there I sometimes tap it on
accident, because its always above the "search web" that I'd like to use.

------
xondono
The only feature that I use google search for nowadays is extension filtering.

Ext:pdf is great for finding about technical topics

------
known
Non-trivial difference when I searched for faropenem

[https://archive.vn/qobaw](https://archive.vn/qobaw)

[https://archive.is/JLxvI](https://archive.is/JLxvI)

------
99chrisbard
DDG is fine for me. !g whenever it doesn't work well enough.

------
keriati1
Searching for opening times of local shops is what keeps me on Google for
now... Very basic but very common search for me...

------
mkbkn
I prefer Ecosia.org as they plant trees.

~~~
kmos
Me too ;-)

------
Vomzor
Is there a website or plugin that shows google/duckduckgo or google/bing
results side by side?

------
artur_makly
What I find interesting is that DDG ranks our site:
[https://VisualSitemaps.com](https://VisualSitemaps.com) 2x higher than Google
when searching for “visual sitemap generator”...and of course sans ads.

------
markosaric
I've gone down the Google-free rabbit hole myself lately. Being Facebook-free
is so much easier than Google-free but here's what I switched to:

Chrome browser -> Firefox

Google search -> DuckDuckGo (StartPage for specific searches that DuckDuckGo
doesn't do well at)

Gmail -> ProtonMail

Maps -> OpenStreetMap

Translate -> DeepL

Analytics -> removed them from my site completely so no tracking scripts at
all

Details: [https://markosaric.com/surveillance-
capitalism/](https://markosaric.com/surveillance-capitalism/)

------
d0mine
counsel-search `C-c s` in Emacs uses duckduckgo by default.

