| 9:30 pm on Jan 15, 2014 (gmt 0)|
DDG CEO on CNBC at the moment.
| 2:21 am on Jan 16, 2014 (gmt 0)|
DDG maintains a secure monthly search volume page here - https://duckduckgo.com/traffic.html
Lets see if they can keep the momentum going. Clean results, I like them, big brand isn't in your face.
| 7:15 am on Jan 16, 2014 (gmt 0)|
|I'd love it DuckDuckGo took off |
Simply use it, link it, recommend it.
Once upon a time everyone used directories like Yahoo, and DMOZ then along came AltaVista, Inktomi/Yahoo, then Google, and whatever comes next...
Change is possible but it takes people to make it happen as those websites have no power over anyone when it comes to which links you click or the domain you type in the address bar of the browser, their fortunes rise and fall on the decisions people make in the browser so blaming G, Bing, etc. for anything is silly when you gave them that power and continue to do so daily.
Money is hardly the thing holding back a new search engine, it's pure innovation and whoever cracks real semantic search first is going to clean house. The big guys know this and the odds are they'll try to buy it if some startup beats them to it and at that point it truly will be a situation of whoever has the most money will win the game.
I wouldn't be surprised if it happens and a new contender rises in search such as Apple, Twitter or Facebook as they all have big bankrolls and as much to win by being the next big thing in search as anyone.
My bets are on G as they have hired the best names in the world to crack this problem but breakthroughs can't always be purchased, sometimes they come from the least expected places.
| 5:24 am on Jan 20, 2014 (gmt 0)|
|Simply use it, link it, recommend it. |
DDG should allow webmasters to have a site search on their sites, like we have for Adsense. I would be more than happy to replace my search pages with DDG's - even losing my income from said pages.
You should be allowed to customize the colors, what sites to include, results per page, and they could be onto a winner.
| 11:06 am on Jan 20, 2014 (gmt 0)|
They will take suggestions and they have a forum.
| 1:06 am on Jan 21, 2014 (gmt 0)|
|DDG should allow webmasters to have a site search on their sites, like we have for Adsense. I would be more than happy to replace my search pages with DDG's - even losing my income from said pages. |
Lame_Wolf & others:
They have one --> https://duckduckgo.com/search_box and I use it. It's great actually, other than you don't make money (no big deal) and you don't get reporting (trade off: privacy vs google).
Try it! You can even customize the colors on the landing page.
| 9:20 am on Jan 21, 2014 (gmt 0)|
That's a great little search tool Swanny.
| 11:23 pm on Jan 21, 2014 (gmt 0)|
|That's a great little search tool |
I had searched for a good tracking-free search box. I had even considered a Bing or Yahoo box just to not use Google, but hit a dead end there.
The DDG site search box is pretty sweet, I wish I could convince more webmasters to try it :-)
| 10:23 am on Jan 22, 2014 (gmt 0)|
Thank you, Swanny. I will check it out a bit later.
| 2:40 pm on Jan 22, 2014 (gmt 0)|
I was trying to find how to submit a sitemap to DDG, but couldn't.
| 8:30 pm on Jan 22, 2014 (gmt 0)|
ken_b, the DDG support forums have this nugget:
|Because of how we generate results from multiple sources, there's no proper way to submit sitemaps to us, directly. You can, though, submit your sites to our sources--which will then flow through to us |
| 2:23 am on Jan 24, 2014 (gmt 0)|
I've found time to play with it, and I do not like it for 3 reasons.
1: "Because of the way we generate our search results, we do not have the syndication rights to allow you to host our results on your site (e.g. in a frame)"
That's a bummer for me because the colours will clash with my site. Plus, I may want paid advertisers on the results page, or even my own adverts.
2: When you get to the bottom of the page, it gives you an option to check the results from Google etc. No problem with that per se, but it shows the websites listed in the search results. That looks unprofessional and messy, esp when you have a number of sites listed.
3: Fails to show results when more than one site listed.
Clicking on the Google link says...
Your search - blue widgets site:www.example.com,www.example.us,www.example.org - did not match any documents.
If I remove www.example.us and www.example.org, it shows results.
Such as shame, as I was hoping it would be useful to have. Guess I'll have to stay with Google.
| 2:46 am on Jan 24, 2014 (gmt 0)|
1: Although you have to use their results page, I think you can set it to open in a new window, and I know you can customize some of the colors of the landing (search results) page to more closely match your site. Details @ https://duckduckgo.com/params
2: That's not a huge deal for me, but I only use it to search one web site (domain) at a time. Yeah, a little messy but remember their version of site search is a bit more clunky because they're not a multi-billion dollar company like the Goog. You use them if you care about privacy, you use G if you don't want any privacy.
3: Works fine for me when I put in multiple domains. Try leaving off the www. part and see if that helps. Hmmm... maybe it can't handle the .us extension?
| This 43 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 43 ( 1  ) |