- Clean design
- Fast search results with previews
- Layout options
- User privacy
On the second visit, I noticed the "tags" feature: it's possible to narrow down the search results by suggested key words. Very nice user experience.
One idea: perhaps there can be a description of how to set Peekier as the default search engine (for example: https://duckduckgo.com/install).
I wonder about the practical benefits of having previews, whether it helps me find what I need quicker. The movement of the eyes while scanning through the results feels a little less efficient (scan sideways; look for beginning of next row; repeat) - compared to scanning a list straight down.
Still, the site is intriguing. I'll continue using it to see how it feels.
Another idea, not so related to the search engine feature: I wish there was an "explore" page (like on GitHub) to see what's new/popular/etc.
Where do you get your data from? Do you use your own crawlers? I wish there was a traditional list based search results page too, then I could actually consider using this. I use Startpage now, but it has some strange bugs that's been plaguing the result pages for years.
It is too early to discuss "the agenda" behind it because there is none. If it catches on and becomes popular enough, I have a few ideas on how to make it sustainable without sacrificing any of the privacy features.
I definitely plan to check it out more fully when I have some free time - but so far, I'm impressed with it. I like it!
But I'm having trouble believing that it doesn't cost much. Isn't that lot of bandwidth (getting pages and generating previews), especially if you are doing that on the fly? Or does your crawler generate and cache preview images? If the latter how large is your index?
Is the monthly cost minimal simply because you don't yet have much traffic?
I highly doubt that your queries are primarily coming from your own engine. The results are too good. It has good ranking, spelling correction, super large indices, and is fast. For example searching "GTGACCTTGGGCAAGTTACTTAACCTCTCTGTGCCTCAGTTTCCTCATCTGTAAAATGGGGATAATA" works even though it only occurs on a few pages and as the blog post that string came from explains, you need super fancy indexing techniques to handle things like that quickly. You also talk about this as if it is a single-person project, which makes it even less likely you made all this from scratch.
I like the concept and the parts that you undoubtedly make yourself like the UI, image retrieval and caching, are really good. This is a great site don't get me wrong. I just think you should be more forthcoming about where your results are coming from.
oh man. My absolute favorite assignment in undergrad computer science classes involved searching ~50GB of compressed text files containing protein sequences, to see how many times "ATG" or something occurred.
It was a ton of fun. Minimum requirements were to get the correct counts. Then it turned in to a competition to see who could make the fastest solution. You had like 8 machines at your disposal, each with the full dataset, to distribute whatever you wanted.
I think we did it in 3 languages or so (java, erlang, something else...).
For example it would have been nice to see a "results from Bing" message somewhere on the search page, or an item on the about page saying that you use another search engine's results.
It would actually have increased my confidence and impression of your project. I know that you can't have made a fantastic query engine like Bing/Google's without a ton of engineers so you must be using someone else's, and it would have given me a better impression if you said that up front instead of my having to infer that.
What's really made it difficult for competitors is being able to match Google's index. Bing crawls a lot of pages but is much more picky about what it index?
Also can you say where you are pulling the results from the Yandex API, Bing, Yahoo or Google itself?
1. Do a list results view like Google - you're competing on so many levels that you don't want to challenge standards unless you have massive justifications that you're UX is better. I don't think the tiles are better and even if they were a little better it wouldn't be enough to challenge the paradigm.
2. Can you (or do you) restrict search results that have a high AdBlock/PrivacyBadger score? I've always wanted that so much more than I'm concerned about my privacy vis-a-vis my search engine provider?
Second was that I get a TON of results for foreign languages: ie, a search for "gw2 wiki" results in wiki-de.guildwars2.com wiki-fr.guildwars.com and ja.gw2.wikia.com .. 3 out of top 10, 5 out of top 15 were non english, and I dont see anywhere to filter that. That might be an edge case (where 33% of results are non-English) but it highlights the shortcoming.
On the note of thinking I was only getting video/image results... I dont see anywhere to filter by result type - which is pretty standard in other search engines now.
You probably meant to say utmost. Outmost could imply a lesser importance or the complete opposite if read into too much.
That said there are some interesting ideas here, but I need to use a lot more to compare results to google, so far they've been pretty accurate
Screenshots are pretty neat, but can also be distracting. I like what duckduckgo does with its instant answers, giving me a short answer that doesn't distract the overall flow of reading.
Edit: searx even somewhat supports ddg instant answers, though very wip.
I could definitely stand for a "no animation mode", though. Ie, screw the css animations. They may be nice to make your site pretty, but when i am trying to ingest lots of results to find the correct one, i want things fast. The animations feel far too slow and cumbersome.
It's fairly snappy, it's just that any animation just bothers me when i'm trying to click from link to link to link, you know?
Ie, if i'm using Google, i open tab after tab in the background for any sites i need to research. That has near instant feedback, no delay. I know it's different, because i'm not actively looking at the background tab, but effectively for my use case that is the UX you are trying to replace by viewing the content in real time, inside your site. So i need to be able to click, and then click away, with as little delay as possible (instant, preferably). An animation just gets in the way for that, to me at least.
Note that i am more than willing to wait for the page to load. I'm not trying to be unrealistic. I just don't want to wait, any time, to popup already loaded content. I suspect the animation also gives the content time to load the higher res version, so that i can't say much about. If it needs to be, it needs to be :)
I'll check out the low graphics mode, thanks!
The clickable suggestions at the top are an awesome idea. It's an improvement from having to start typing again to get suggestions.
Overall, this looks polished and well-designed. Competition in the search engine space is still sorely needed.
I do expect some breakage when using a niche extension like this, but it seems like it would be fixed for my use case if something like plainOldText's idea were implemented.
edit: Or if the scroll button thing were an a tag, I suppose I could "click" it like any other link from the keyboard. It does load more (somewhat reluctantly) if I scroll down with the arrow keys.
Also the description for your site needs to be recrawled :)
One question tough: How large is your index? I haven't seen any information on that, or did I miss anything?
"Peekier (pronounced /'pi·ki·er/)"
If it's spelled exactly as it would be if you wanted it to be pronounced another way, it should be pronounced that way
(nope, I don't have weird cookies in my browser and it was an incognito session anyway)
I have changed the default safe search setting to Strict.
The link is gone, now—good job, I think it's a safer choice.
Google tested a similar "view a screenshot of the search result" feature a while back. You'd hover over a result and it'd show the screenshot in a column to the right. For whatever it's worth, they axed it, although I don't know the reasons why.
Also Google is notorious for putting out half-baked prototypes and quickly abandoning them, so it might very well be that the concept does better with a more dedicated team. I'm going to give this a shot for a few days and see how it is.
I get that it's trying to be different, but it's going against what the users are trying to accomplish. Would be interesting running tests on this for certain query types getting certain layouts, etc. Anyway, good luck!
If I type in "adult learning", I get no search results at all (no results found). A slightly different search, "Adult education", gives me the results I would expect. Ditto just "learning", just "adult"; so I'm not sure if its an issue in the index, or the strict search filtering..
More information here: https://peekier.com/privacy
Fwiw, i like the site but that seems like a silly assertion. Yes, some sites could do terrible things with your page visit, but a search engine you frequently use could do far worse things than some random site i visit once.
Not knocking the product, i just dislike that statement, and feel it should be reworded. I understand your intent, the sentence just doesn't convey that accurately, imo.