I don't know why people think that DDG needs to "stop" Google; did people think that Lycos and Infoseek and Yahoo couldn't coexist back in the 90's? I think it's good that both companies have some competition from each other.
I tried DDG, it worked good but Google is better. I can’t afford to spend cycles wondering what Google would have returned when I’m trying to research something while I code.
At this point I've found DDG to be comparable to Google, but occasionally I have to do the !g to find what I'm looking for.
You don't go "wow, that burger sucked, I'll go get the competitors now", you're already satiated enough with your crappy burger. Because it's easy and cheap to run a query, you're almost forced to check.
Given how much better Google often does, running my queries on DDG in the first place is generally a waste of my time.
What does that imply about sustainability of free market capitalism?
After all, all market benefits and dynamics die off if people on the market are unable to exercise choice.
Seems like everyone’s has a different experience with DDG. But it’s sounds like it’s better in some categories than other stuff.
> We also of course have more traditional links in the search results, which we also source from a variety of partners, including Oath (formerly Yahoo) and Bing.
Kind of goes to show that the personal information we are giving away may not be that important when it comes to finding what we need, even as it makes us a bigger and juicier target for ads.
If your goal is to convince others, you should collect the data yourself and share it with them.
I don't particularly care who is giving me the data as long as the results tend to be OK; I don't run any MS crap at home but if their search service tends to work alright, then power to them.
DDG is much better for searches that I don't want personalized results for.
There is nothing stopping you from falling back to google that 5% of the time.