

Ask HN: Am I the only one who's not in love with Google Instant? - kloncks

Let me make it clear that I do like the idea of Google Instant. And, YouTube Instant. And, HN Instant. Edit: Now iTunes Instant too.<p>But can someone give me an official reason why it's better? I think it's safe to say that I prefer the old Google better than this...being instant and Ajaxy is nice but for now it's tacky.<p>I really did just prefer the Search Suggestions more than anything.<p>What am I missing?
======
brosephius
I hate it. I'm very precise with my queries, so it's faster for me to type the
whole thing in. I particularly hated how the search field grabbed focus when
you pressed a key anywhere on the page, because if you did it unintentionally
it would register in the textbox and the search results would change. I dunno,
maybe I'm just a curmudgeon, but I had no problems whatsoever with my previous
search workflow.

------
sofuture
No, I don't like it. I know exactly what I want to type, and I don't like the
jarring flashes of intermittent guesses of results on my way to 'just typing
what I want'.

------
ugh
I like it a lot. It just seems to me that this is how all searches should
work, i.e. displaying their results immediately without initiating the search.
Most of my desktop programs already work that way, why shouldn’t Google?

~~~
moe
_Most of my desktop programs already work that way, why shouldn’t Google?_

I think there's a difference.

Most desktop apps return structured results in tabular format. Those are much
easier to skim because you know what to expect in each field, and you're
usually looking at only one column anyways (e.g. the "title" or "filename").

Google results are not tabular (perhaps they should be?) and I find it rather
hard to keep track of what I had already skimmed while the display shuffles
furiously.

------
yrb
I don't think we are in the target demographic for these 'features'. If you
know how to structure queries, and can touch type the usefulness is greatly
diminished.

However there are a lot of people out there that can't touch type and have to
reformulate their query multiple times before they get 'acceptable' results.
So Google instant actually has a meaningful increase of their iteration time,
and thus enables them to find better results faster.

~~~
StavrosK
Oh God, there are people who click on the words in the autocomplete box,
aren't there...

------
crux
I thought it was neat when I first came across it, and thought, 'well, why
not?' but the fact is that the only time I am typing into the google search
bar in the webpage, and not built into my browser's address bar, is to tweak
the results that I have gotten out of a search. And I tend to do that while
reading the results themselves. After I had those results pulled out from
under me while reading several times in a row, I turned it off.

------
nkurz
Well, I appreciate that it's still possible to turn it off, which I did
immediately. I think it probably serves a purpose on mobile devices where text
entry is difficult and slow, but I don't see the point otherwise.

My main gripe with it is that it limits the number of results returned to 10,
which I find to be unusable. I have it set to 100 (the current max) and wish
it could be much higher so I didn't have to keep hitting 'Next'.

I can see why Google would want to return only 10 results (more ad
impressions, less work for their servers) but anyone here actually prefer
getting so few results? I've almost never seen anyone else's browser set up to
return anything but the default, and have never known whether this is
ignorance, acceptance, or conscious choice.

~~~
SapphireSun
Usually, if the result is not in the first 3 or 4 I try a new search, so
changing the default doesn't do much for me.

------
EnergizerBunny
I turned it off. Maybe I'm a luddite but nothing that Google does of late is
very interesting.

~~~
mahmud
Turn off JavaScript altogether. NoScript makes the web sane.

~~~
jmtulloss
Also, largely unusable.

------
KeithMajhor
Bing is making them nervous. Instant has gotten them a lot of attention and
Bing doesn't have the infrastructure to imitate it.

~~~
fleitz
There was a bing instant a few months ago. It was a 3rd party site made via
the bing API, but it had very similar speed.

I'm interested in how you know that bing does not have the infrastructure to
support it?

~~~
what
Here's the Bing Instant: <http://www.istartedsomething.com/livesearch/>

It's actually from a year ago. It doesn't automatically search for a predicted
query, just uses what you've typed in so far. But you can mouse over the query
suggestions to search for them.

~~~
lvumam
How about <http://www.binginstant.com>

------
jsz0
Not a fan of it either. It feels like fool's gold to me. Partial searches
don't get me the results I need but the screen updates seem to trigger me to
read the results anyway. I know searching for "Barack Obama" isn't going to
help me find the text of a speech he gave 5 months ago on HCR but I'm
profoundly optimistic somehow it will. I recognize this isn't Google's problem
but we all want to believe in magic sometimes. The parallel that jumped out to
me was tab completion in command lines or CLI history. Sometimes you spend
more time mucking around with this than it would have taken to just type the
command manually.

------
bmr
I don't like it either. I think it falls into the category of technically
impressive, but real-world silly. The small decrease in search time is
completely offset by feeling like I'm having a seizure.

------
Gormo
I don't even like the idea of it.

I think it removes an important aspect of UI that has until now been so
entrenched that we take it completely for granted: pressing 'enter' signifies
the completion of input.

In a conversation between humans, it's considered rude to begin responding to
someone before they're finished talking. This behavior is more than just an
interruption; it ignores the full thought intended by the speaker in favor of
an assumption.

Interacting with software is no different; even if the conversational dynamic
doesn't directly apply, we still have similar subconscious expectations. I
don't want a response until I press enter. Before that, I'm in the process of
constructing my search terms as I type them, often revising them, expanding
them, and correcting typos.

Besides all of that, Google is now executing several queries for every single
query that would have been provided previously. Most users are probably not
even going to look at the results until they're done typing, so this is
probably a significant waste of bandwidth and CPU cycles that could be put to
better use.

------
yef
The rationale is that it makes searches faster, but turn it off if you don't
like it.

<http://www.google.com/preferences?hl=en> and search for "Google Instant".

I haven't quite made up my mind yet. I don't mind it, but then again most of
my searches come from the Chrome address bar.

------
ams6110
I don't like it either. That said I don't even like the autocomplete
suggestions in the search box. I don't like intellisense or anything else that
actively throws completions in my face.

I do like tab-completion e.g. at a shell prompt for filenames, but that's
something I initiate. It's the automatic kind I don't like.

------
BJakopovic
I'm the same. It is nifty and a cool trick... but didn't deserve to enter the
mainstream (in it's current form). But there are underlying motivations that
warranted the change before it was ready for mass deployment.

------
jamesbritt
I turned it off in Firefox because it seems to capture EVERY key press and
apply it to the search, obliterating assorted navigation shortcuts I have in
place via some add-ons.

But, every without that, there's a noticeable lag in handling my typing, which
is annoying, and I've yet to find a result I wanted before I was done entering
all I intended into the search field.

It's an issue with many AJAXy UI items; they are so busy trying to second-
guess my every keystroke that my every keystroke becomes a burden to enter.

------
vicaya
It doesn't impact me as I use <https://encrypted.google.com/> (automagically
via the wonderful HTTPS Everywhere firefox plugin.) which doesn't have the
instant feature turned on by default.

OTOH, it's a very smart move for G from technical POVs, since their cache hit
rate would be much higher as the queries are normalized in greater portion, so
that the real impact on their backend is small in comparison (of the overall
search volume.)

------
frederickcook
I find it very useful when searching for the answer to a programming question.
If the MAN page for the language/framework/whatever doesn't provide me with
enough information, and I"m looking for an implementation example, it's great.
Sometimes it takes a certain keyword or multiple to find the specific result
I'm looking for, and I love that I can just keep playing around with the
search query until I find something that looks right.

------
doron
I love it. It is a great tool for finding literary references,for instance,
recalling part of a quote or a poem you have in memory, and correcting based
on results, turns out to be a great time saver for me.

When my search is exact, I don't use it, and since I search google primarily
through chrome or the search bar in firefox, this feature is only visible to
me when I actually require it.

------
jackfoxy
I do not like it. Until today I couldn't get Google to use my saved search
settings. It kept using Instant and giving me 10 results per page.

I have developed my Googleing technique over a long time. This was a major
interruption and for no benefit to me. Maybe if all you do is enter searches
that always display the result you are looking for in the top 10, this is
something good.

------
whackedspinach
I like it for certain searches. If I'm trying to debug something, putting in
the full error message doesn't always help. I start typing in part of it
though, and I may get someone with a similar, but not exact issue. so it's
useful for things like that. But if I know what I'm looking for, I can just as
easily use the Chromium address bar.

------
Jach
I'm mostly indifferent to it. I like not having to have a noticeable delay
after pressing enter or whatever, and this doesn't affect my autopager addon,
so I'm leaving it on unless it makes me mad somehow later. Most of my searches
are in the google-bar anyway rather than through their homepage so I don't get
it much.

------
Tycho
I think they should make a slight change so that when you delete all of the
text, it keeps the previous results visible until you start typing again.
Sometimes just as you clear the field you catch a relevant result in the
corner of your eye, but a moment later it all vanishes, with no 'back'

------
quizbiz
I only now have begun to use the I'm feeling lucky feature. I will type in my
specific query, or rather begin to and as soon as it brings up a match I hit
the down arrow and then I hit the right arrow. This has already become muscle
memory and I recommend that everyone give this a try.

------
asdf333
One person its great for is Google.

I bet they save a bunch of cpu resources by 'directing' people to the right
search queries (which are cached) instead of dealing w/ misspellings and
running searches that the user doesn't really want anyway.

~~~
AndyKelley
How does it save resources for Google? It can only cost more resources, since
every time someone searches now, they are actually searching about ten times.
Can you explain your logic?

------
woodall
It is slowly my searches down. a-jax is neat, but it still takes time to load.
When I query something that is more than five words it just gets annoying.
They do let you disable it, and that is better than nothing.

------
baddox
I always make my first search from the Chrome address bar, and if I then
modify my search on the actual Google page, I finish typing and hit Enter well
before seeing any of the so-called instantness.

------
grantjgordon
It's a neat-o trick, but in actual use I:

a) haven't found any practical benefit to having it b) feel slightly ill-at-
ease with the way it affects impression and click counting for adwords.

------
Miserlou57
I tried Youtube Instant first and hated it. Should have opened my mouth
earlier...

It's okay; maybe I'll just get used to it, like every Facebook revision, ever.

------
brazzy
I'm utterly indifferent, because for about a year now I've been using the
search box in Firefox exclusively. Instant isn't going to make me switch back.

------
c1sc0
I don't like the jump from centered to top. But it doesn't really affect me
because most of my searches go through a browser search box anyway.

------
binarysoul
I miss having another search bar at the bottom of the search results.. Turns
out, now that its not there, I used it a lot

------
lionhearted
I like it overall, but I miss the second search box at the bottom of the page.

------
aufreak3
I believe you can turn it off. Just do it. They're watching you anyways.

------
drivingmenuts
I did one search and then turned it off.

------
gojomo
I appreciate that on many searches, especially simple/common ones, Google
Instant may save some seconds.

I think it helps me less than others because as a heavy, technical user, my
queries tend to be longer and more unique -- less likely the autocompletes or
top-predicted query are what I meant.

One negative for me is that it drops my displayed results to 10, from the 100
I normally prefer. I like to scan several screenfuls of snippets to pick just
a few results that are most likely to be best.

The flickering display of interim results is a little distracting -- but not a
major problem.

I mostly search from the Firefox search box, so only see it occasionally.

So, I haven't yet turned it off -- still giving it chance to see how it works
with more experience.

------
Matthewp
I switched to Bing.

~~~
poundy
Or you could turn off instant search.

------
drewse
Sure, it changes the way we will search. But is that a good thing?

It's all about whether we want change. Change can be good, but think about how
long (if ever) it could take for more time to be saved than time lost getting
used to the change in the first place.

Also think about it this way: people have been searching on search engines for
over decade in an very uniform way, regardless of the search engine. Search
engines aren't that intuitive, even if they try to be. They aren't that user
friendly, even if they try to be. But people worked with what they were given,
and got quite good at. Now Google wants to break our habits, and a I don't
think I want to. Not only because of the time I would lose changing my habits,
but because it works just fine.

Another reason why Google Instant does not work for me is since it only works
for "browsing" and not "finding". Sometimes people will go to Google to just
"browse" a broad topic. They're not necessarily looking for a specific website
or detail. So after entering a broad search term, Google Instant helps them
narrow their search query. On the other hand, sometimes people will go to
Google to "find" a specific topic subject, point, or answer. Therefore they
don't want suggested search terms. They have already crafted a detailed search
in the heads and are not looking for suggestions. In these cases, Google
Instant just acts as a distraction. And that brings me to my problem with
Google Instant: I use it for "finding" 90% of the time and only 10% of the
time do I use it to "browse". I have a feeling that many tech-savy people here
on HN probably have a similar distribution of their time spent on Google Since
Google Instant only works for us the 10% of the time, it's hard to justify
using it all.

------
White_N_Nerdy
I have Javascript turned off entirely for www.google.com because I don't like
the redirects on their links and I have found no other way to get rid of them
in Chrome.

I tried instant search in Firefox. I don't like the way the search box changes
position and I don't like the big drop-down notification and I don't like the
way that when you press Enter, it refreshes the results. I guess it's safe to
say I don't like it.

~~~
sosuke
May I ask what you are using to disabled Javascript on the Google search
pages? That sounds really useful.

~~~
White_N_Nerdy
In Chrome, I go to Wrench -> Options -> Under the Hood -> Content Settings...
-> Javascript -> Exceptions... -> Add... -> Pattern: www.google.com Action:
Block

~~~
sosuke
That is perfect, thank you very much!

------
GrandMasterBirt
Sorry, big duck duck go user so I haven't even seen the new feature in action.

