I want to like it, but it gives off a bad vibe.
Second, no easy way to add it in my Firefox search engine list. This is really something obvious they should fix, come on.
Third, they want you to install an extension that will indeed set qwant as default search engine, but also seems to try to shove down your throat some sort of bookmark and "board" (their own thing, pinterest like?) management which requires login to their service.
IMHO it doesn't really live up to the expectations and it seems more like a social media experiment attempt.
If we forego the whole privacy thing which I think they are only using for marketing here, then the search results don't seem too bad (in my 2 minutes of testing) and the boards thing is interesting, but nah.
>Second, no easy way to add it in my Firefox search engine list. This is really something obvious they should fix, come on.
I see a green plus in the corner of the magnifying glass icon in the search box and when you click it, at the bottom of the search engines I have installed I see "Add quant."
I don't see that green plus you are talking about, I stared and stared.
Right now I'm reading the frontpage and getting distracted from news with political opinions to which I don't even agree. Basically getting in the way of engineering.
It integrates nicely into Firefox. I've found results to be pretty good and relevant when I use it. Found it before DDG and now I use both depending on what machine I'm on.
Anyway, they claim they are "the world's most private search engine".
That's weird, on my side I have the "Add Qwant" option show up in my firefox search field. I'm on Firefox 56.0.2 Win7.
I genuinely don't understand this hostile statement. Why do you complain that a website isn't functional in pure html in 2017? do you want the web to look like it's 1998?
I don't understand this statement. Is there less js-enabled browser in Europe, or in France?
Let's reverse the question: the task "map this text input to a list of links" could be done in 1998 with no scripts, why is it dependent on JS in 2017?
The question is only; how much is too much. And considering your competition is Google, that answer is: not a lot.
The default view is a bit overloaded in my opinion...
A plus point is that qwant also supports hashbangs like duckduckgo.
Isn’t that a sad truth, only made worse by the irony that a lot of us went to work in the States. A lot of Europe is still conceptually stuck in the pre-UNIX, lone desktop Windows/MS-DOS, early ’90’s era, while the rest of the world runs them by with macOS PC’s and iPads. Lots of European UNIX talent left for the States right at the cusp of the dot-com era and helped build the Internet because that’s where all the action was. We never really recovered from that.
"while the rest of the world runs them by with macOS PC’s and iPads" Buying istuff is somehow progressive?
> conceptually stuck in the pre-UNIX, lone desktop Windows/MS-DOS
It's about understanding that quality matters, that UX is a thing, that design is more than just a theme, that machines are networked to varying degrees and frequency, with varying performance profiles, form factors and interaction models, and that this field is different from fordist industrial endeavours and you'd better read the Mythical Man Month if you want to have any chance at a viable let alone competitive RTT instead of treating your coding engineers as crappy brick layers.
The early ‘90’s computing paradigm with a lone desktop PC user and application isn’t cutting it any more. At the very least, one good thing came out of change.
I would rather drop dead. I’m a UNIX guy, Solaris guy to be precise and that means illumos and SmartOS in particular. I value stability, formal specifications, the ability to introspect the system, a system which can self heal and is paranoid about correctness of operation and data. A system which is always engineered to be backwards compatible. Exactly everything that SmartOS is and GNU/Linux isn’t! illumos and SmartOS are using CDDL which is by and large less restrictive than the GPL, so GNU/Linux stands for everything I fight against. There are no words in any of the languages I speak which can express my hate of GNU and GNU/Linux.
As for macOS and iOS, I don’t care about open because I neither intend nor want to tinker with it: I want to pay, bring home, turn on and use. As long as all the hardware works, the thing is responsive and I have xterm and ssh to log into my SmartOS datacenter, I’m good to go. Not going to waste my life with GNU/Linux, I do that too much at work aleady. Simply not going to happen.
What I mean by responsiveness is that my 2013 MacBook Air is usable instantaneously while my barely a year old work laptop with Windows 7 needs half an hour to get to the point where it is able to launch an application. Then I launch it, but since it has other apps starting in the background as I’m working they keep popping up their windows and taking the focus away, interrupting my thought and workflow. A macOS app will never appropriate the focus, nor will subwindows be modal, forcing me to close them first if I want to get at the data in the main window. Windows is just crap.
For lower levels of the stack (e.g.: IaaS), there is no way to be competitive against SV without subsidy b/c fwcit there is no access to capital nor enough talents to this problem size.
The prospective is not getting any better at the immigration level, the greencard schema has been repelled and companies are having even harder time to attract talent.
First of all, this is okay. But not good.
I've tried several "slang" searches that google gets just fine. I've tried these because ddg had/has problems with them for a long time.
E.g. If I google for "poe shavs" (a slang term for an item with an abbreviation of the game name), I expect https://pathofexile.gamepedia.com/Shavronne%27s_Wrappings
from what I've tried this seems to work even without a search history on google. I've tried this across different cookieless browsers and IP's. Google just seems to get it.
This seems to return (almost) the exact same shit as bing on Qwant. So I do not see how this is an improvement over bing/ddg/whatever.
Man I'd love to get rid of google in my personal life, but... for my searches nobody else seems to perform. Google just seems to know what I want to search, even if I don't have a search history on that machine.
Edit: For searches in german it seems to perform similarily shitty to bing. Do they get search results from bing?
To understand "poe" as path of exile, it helps to know that you at least once searched for path of exile. After it has seen a few hundreds users do that, it will make the connection.
To know that "poe shavs" refers to the game and not Edgar Alan Poe, it probably had to provide a link to a relevant author's name and to the game's page and watch which links people would more likely click.
There is a chicken and egg here. People want a search engine that can read their minds without invading their privacy, that's a hard problem.
However, it's becoming useless for infrequent searches. Try googling any random error message and notice 90% of the results don't even contain it.
One, I do not share this experience, and think the quality issue is overstated (you are more likely to remember the time that a query failed, than when it succeeded).
Two, if you can produce a POC, Google can use this to improve the search results.
As is, the issue brought up by original poster is too vague and unspecified to be of any use.
You can still revert to the original behaviour by selecting 'Verbatim' from the search tools menu, but you cannot make it default. And in time I'm sure some marketing head will remove even that option.
Edit: and if you never experience it, my guess is you're working with some technology that's "in fashion".
I do agree that Google is focusing more and more on the common internet user, and not the early tech adopters. This forces us to use tricks like the double quotes, while keeping the search engine user-friendly for the vast majority of ad-clicking internetters.
The behavior you are referring to is called https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Query_expansion and while this improves the search results for many people with imprecise or misspelled queries, if you trained yourself to search with exact matches, you'll need some time to adapt (or get in the habbit of adding double quotes).
Come on!!! This is not my first rodeo. I’ve been on the InterNet (yes, with a capital N) since 1993 and I use double quote searching all the time, except that in cases like these one gets zero results back.
Apparently you are the only person in the universe that regularly gets never-before-seen error messages. I feel for you, but I hope you stay away from any issue tracker I am involved in, because no matter your vast experience, the quality of your error reporting is downright poor.
If exact match search is unable to find your error message, then you wouldn't have found it on 2005 Google either. You wouldn't find it on any other search engine. You are (poorly and vaguely) describing a problem that must have always been there and blaming it on an unrelated recent UI change.
All the while unable/unwilling to give a single concrete example, just noisy ranting. For all I know you are, despite your experience, banging your head against the keyboard, until you get 0 results. The burden is on you to show that there is a teapot orbiting the Sun. Good luck!
That’s where you’re wrong: I’ve used the double quotation marks search technique since before Google and I’ve known about it and used it since Google’s debut.
I already told you I’m not compiling anything and can’t give you a reproducible test case right now but you chose to disregard that; I’ve also told you what to do to reproduce the problem yourself (“attempt to compile GCC, get an error, search with Google with and without double quotation marks”), but you don’t want to do that because it’s a lot of work, I know, but that’s your problem and here’s why:
The burden is on you to show that there is a teapot orbiting the Sun.
that is why, since you’re wrong again: I’ve switched to “DuckDuckGo” as my primary search engine and rarely use Google any more since the results are nothing but advertising-soiled false positives; I don’t care whether you do something about it or not. Now, you might wisen up and take my feedback about exact or partial error searching earnestly or not. You wanted feedback, you got it; your move on what to do about it. Good luck.
Why should we have to work around it?
Google is really good at that. I can't use DDG for programming because DDG thinks I want to learn more about Elm trees.
Sponsored by European Union, France and a Germany and dubbed as Google clone a few years ago is "Exalead", a real large scale web search engine. Unfortunately it got bought by Daussault (Catia 3D CAD), but it's still online and works:
They are going through aggressive growth phase right now and could need a hand fix many things. As you mentioned (the NLP problem):
* 1st: http://haringey.store/reforestation/in/reforestation_in_arid...
* 2nd: http://haringey.store/reforestation/in/reforestation_in_arid...
* 4th: http://maestron.store/reforestation/in/reforestation_in_arid...
* 5th: http://pipcoins.store/reforestation/in/reforestation_in_arid...
etc, etc. All of which were "bad" websites. It's a shame because some good results (science direct, …) were inside the lot. The content isn't even a pdf.
You should implement a "unique" webpage result fingerprint in order to avoid showing duplicates (well, I suppose it's easier said than done..).
I want a search engine that loads quickly and gives good results, DDG does that while protecting my privacy.
One potential advantage is it's run out of Europe instead of the US, which is significant for certain people.
Back in the day you'd go to Lycos, Hotbot, Yahoo, et. al. and you'd get different results! There was a difference with search engines that would leads you to all kinds of interesting stuff. Today it's all monolithic. It's going to be either indexed by Google or on some mega walled garden like FB/Twitter/Tumblr/etc.
We need more alternative search engines. I personally stopped using the verb "Googled" and try to say "Searched for" instead. The world needs to be more than just Google.
A couple of points of feedback though:
- When I go through the lite version (which should almost be the default), if I image search, clicking on the results takes me to the webpage that the image is on, not the image itself. If i wanted that I wouldn't be doing an image search.
- There's an "install qwant" button in the top right hand of the screen. I'm not clear what i'd be installing if i clicked on that, or why i should need or want to install anything to use a search engine?
- I've gotten two separate front-pages when visiting www.qwant.com on desktop. One is a semi-minimalist page, a bit more complicated than the lite version, but quite nice and clean. If this was the default i'd be happy. The second was a version more reminiscent of the old "yahoo" type setup, with news and stories and random stuff splattered everywhere below the search bar. Subjectively, the second one needs to die. However, i'm not sure why its no longer turning up for me (even though I'm glad it isn't). I certainly haven't saved my account, nor am i consciously using a remembered URL.
- I got a captcha type thing popping up saying there'd been a lot of activity from my location. I'm pretty sure I'm not currently behind my VPN, so that seemed weird for me to be seeing such...
- On mobile, that just took WAY too long to open. Almost 10 seconds. As others have mentioned, you need to eliminate half the crap and make the rest more responsive. I don't go to search engine to view tabloid stories (or if i did, i'd search for them), i'm there to search.
- Its not entirely clear why it seems that the links on the lite page are redirects, but the links on the main page appear to be direct? Is that deliberate? A bug? Obviously one would prefer them all to be direct.
- Don't know what's going on, it appeared to me subjectively that the main page was picking up successfully that I was from Australia. However, during one of my searches using the lite page, the options up the top of "web, news, social", etc looked like they were in another language (looked dutch-ish to me).
There is an addon for Firefox to use it as a search engine:
"If you haven't created a Qwant account to save your settings, you can use the following link as a homepage or drag it into your bookmarks:
Show me something different, not the same thing as everyone else with a promise about my privacy and some different graphical sugar. To beat the established competitors you don't need to be incrementally better, you need to be qualitatively different.
I do prefer it DDG, at least for desktop use, because it's actually using the whole of my screen for a change. But wow me with something. I haven't had that in a while.
After like 2 searches I got:
A high amount of connections have been detected from your location and you have been blocked.Please, validate the anti-robot below to be allowed access to the website.
What a disappointment, I was expecting some job requirements regarding the handling of shuriken, nunchakus, sword fighting, art of camouflage, ...
Ah, and something like the graduation note of Shaolin Temple, in case of attendance.
Yes. The EIB "loaned" them 25 million Euro:
Is it just me, or are these two statements oxymorons?
Still a problem if you search for your own name, but I don't think you can do much about that. Or maybe MS provides a bloom table / index of all keywords they currenty have ads for, so you can check "offline" before sending it to them?
So that's one thing that DDG has over Qwant for me: it works with my browsers.
Now I have to find a way to make it not give me indirect links like:
But give me direct links instead, like:
On DDG this can be done by appending &kd=-1 to the URL.
Does anyone actually want the government of France Germany or Turkey deciding what websites you are allowed to visit?
Why not put all the servers in a location that actually respects freedom and not censor anything AND not track us? That would be something I would be interested in. The whole concept of geo-restricted anything is a ridiculous antithesis to what the internet is supposed to be.
I don't want censored search.
Quite like it on first use. I've been meaning to ditch Google (can't be arsed with "do do no evil" anymore) for a while now and this looks like a good start.
I genuinely hope this works as advertised but I am having a bloody hard time finding out what is behind the scenes from the about website.
I will stick with it because their advertised basic premise strikes a note with me.
Now I know what I am going to do. Bye Google - I was a customer for around 20 years.
any idea if qwant does this?
The auto-completions are also very limited, no long tail suggestions at all.
They also seem to use Elasticsearch from looking at their job postings, but mostly the focus for hiring seems to be on front-end and scripting.
Although they just show Bing results for me so don't know how much of their own index is actually used.
> In March 2017, news articles revealed Qwant displays mainly search results from Bing, except in France and Germany, despite several commitment to be exclusively "made in France".
No one can deny competition in search is desperately needed. Without that Google inevitably becomes more emboldened and seeks to further normalize and expand their creepy behavior.
An approach for a new engine should be both privacy which is a strong message that will resonate and also the technical details so people don't just assume its consuming another backend. That's what will make it interesting.
- Out of 7972 sites, 561 have received at least one referral from Qwant.
We will need to explore this further to get usable numbers.
DDG on the other hand... while I love the idea and would love to use it more often, not only gives poor results for most of my searches but the heavy use of red literally gives me a physical anxiety that makes it basically unusable. I could style the page myself but they really need to consider losing the red in favor of green or purple or gold because I can't be the only one who experiences this.
How long has DDG had its current look for you?
If they do it from scratch, kudos.
Could be solved by making images smaller or increasing resolution.