Duck Duck Go is Pretty Good
I always find what I need with Duck Duck go. I’ve heard others don’t, and I have a suspicion they’re using it wrong.
Anyone used to Google might search for a film by typing in ’that guy with the beard’, and find exactly what they’re looking for, because Google’s algorithm has cached thousands of similar results, and tracked users until it determines exactly which result they want. This probably instils certain habits in constant Google users.
DDG instils its own habits. Its text-based search means users think in terms of content, rather than references. Using one search engine for years makes the others feel unnatural, and perhaps we can blame this familiarity for people swearing their usual search engine obviously works better.
On the other side, Google repeatedly fails to deliver on actual text content. Search for ‘moon landing hoax’, and you’ll find a NASA page on the moon landing. The word ‘hoax’ never appears, because Google results give you what Google want you to see, rather than something relevant to the search.
On the other hand, perhaps if you use Google you won’t find that NASA page when searching for ‘moon landing hoax’. Everyone gets different results, depending on what Google think you want to see. This causes additional problems whenever people need to communicate searches.
If I tell you to search for ‘how does flatpak work’ on Duck Duck Go, I can reasonably assume you’ll get the same result I got - itsfoss.com . Meanwhile, we cannot replicate Google searches, which causes confusion online as people ask ‘why can’t you just look up how snaps work?’, without understanding that someone who doesn’t have a Google account steeped in Canonical might just find videos about how to snap their fingers.