Google competitor DuckDuckGo says it's getting shut out

This article is pure crybaby bullshit PR about a nonexistent problem. Does anyone care about DDG anyway? They're trying to solve a completely imaginary problem, and they haven't got a hope in hell of creating a viable search engine as that costs billions of dollars.<p>Why is this article even on HN?

From the article:<p>"In an interview on Wednesday, [Gabriel] Weinberg said it is difficult to make his DuckDuckGo the default search site in Google's Chrome web browser, and that Google disadvantages his company in the Android mobile operating system as well. ....<p>"It's one-click to get onto Firefox and it's five steps on Chrome and people generally fail," he said.<p>The Google spokeswoman said popular search alternatives were offered on its Chrome browser in a dropdown menu, such as Yahoo and Microsoft's Bing, but any search engine could be easily added."

Excellent PR efforts by DuckDuckGo.<p>But not entirely sure that the arguments presented in this article are valid and would sway a technical crowd.<p>Given how trivial it was just now for me to switch to DDG in Chrome, I don't see how that's anti-competitive.

Many people like DuckDuckGo for good reasons but let's be clear:<p>It does not do any of it's own indexing.<p>It's just a frontend to other very very expensive backends that have millions of dollars behind them.<p>The entire company can be shut down overnight if it's data feeds are cut.

They are completely forgetting about the standard cross-browser external.AddSearchProvider API. One-click install initiation works fine in both Chrome and Firefox in a DuckDuckGo + Google Suggest search plugin I put together at <a href="http://eligrey.com/blog/post/encrypted-duckduckgo-with-google-suggest-search-plugin" rel="nofollow">http://eligrey.com/blog/post/encrypted-duckduckgo-with-googl...</a>

This might be part of the problem<p><a href="http://duckduckgo.com/?q=duck+duck+go+says+it%27s+getting+shut+out" rel="nofollow">http://duckduckgo.com/?q=duck+duck+go+says+it%27s+getting+sh...</a><p><a href="https://www.google.com/#q=duck+duck+go+says+its+getting+shut+out" rel="nofollow">https://www.google.com/#q=duck+duck+go+says+its+getting+shut...</a>

Maybe DDG should get around to actually competing in the search market by, you know, building its own search engine. Let's see if Weinberg has any real engineering chops, or if all he can do is complain.<p>Until DDG bothers to step into the real search arena and compete, they get no interest from me.

The only thing that caught my eye was Google redirecting duck.com to google.com when DDG expressed interest in purchasing the domain. That seems a little underhanded, but not illegal....

I think we all see this as a marketing stunt from DuckDuckGo.

Weinberg has absolutely no right to initiate force against Google. This disgusts me.

What is wrong with people using Google's product and Google showing preference to their products first then others? I mean after all, you are using THEIR software running on THEIR system. Don't like it? Go use something else. No one is forcing you to use Chrome, etc...

I have been a happy DDG user for more than two years and it's one of the best things I have done in a while. It works well, and it's great for productivity. So, that Google does not take it extra easy on them is not surprising. However, as Google matures, they will realize they need an AMD to their Intel. Something that poses little business threat, yet diffuses the antitrust threat. ... Watch.

Frankly all this cry baby entitlement mentality lowers DDG in their users eyes. It makes one wonder if they are just another mouth piece for Microsoft (like Fair search camp).

First of all, in my opinion, executing a frighteningly ambitious idea[1] is like performing inception. You need the simplest version of the idea for it to be "planted" in the user's mind.<p>People aren't using DDG much not because of any difficulties in the browser, because they don't want to. This is a very lame excuse. Google never won its users because they were able to convince users to set their Search Engine as default in their browsers.<p>As for DDG, the problem starts their name - "DuckDuckGo". You don't need to be an analyst with years of experience to say that this won't work because even their name is not something that is a)Catchy b)Easily rememberable c)Simple. Contrast this with Google. That's just one quick, easy to remember word. Now compare, Duck+Duck+Go. That's three words and it seems <i>long</i>. It looks like they didn't put much thought into this. This is not to say that DDG didn't do their homework properly, but just that it seems a little immature, given their name and their strategy. It looks more like they just read PG's essay[1] and started something out of the quick inspiration.<p>To kill a huge competitor like Google, you need to provide more <i>value</i>. Google is very hard to kill right now because, 1)Their search is vastly superior 2)a lot of people are <i>locked</i> into their ecosystem 3)They have created a valuable <i>brand</i>. No, by locked, I don't mean it's a bad thing. For example, I use Gmail, Google Contacts, Calendar, Blogger, Google Apps for my domains and a lot of other stuff because <i>I want to</i>. A single sign-in into their Eco-system lets me use all these services. And now, the best part is there's Android which seems to integrate all these things so easily like a snap that makes my life just a breeze.<p>So, first you need to understand that Google is now more than a search engine. Because if it was, Bing would have overtook it long back. You need to analyze the reasons why people still use Google. It's not just a search engine that they're using it for. Google has taken years and years to build the trust factor into their users. It has taken them years to make all these users "fit" into their eco-system and create a tremendously valuable <i>brand</i> . It's not like that they did it in just one day. So, just starting a new search-engine and expecting people to join on board is not going to happen. Despite so many "Ad" controversies, Google is still the king here because of the trust factor that no one else in the industry is able to provide. The trust factor that they will remain here, unlike the rest is the most important value that they provide to their users.<p>If you want to kill Google at this instant, you are going to do a lot more hardwork than you thought you should do, you need a <i>brand</i> of similar magnitude and the important essence here is the time and trust factor which everyone seems to ignore.<p>[1]<a href="http://paulgraham.com/ambitious.html" rel="nofollow">http://paulgraham.com/ambitious.html</a>

I worked in Search and on Search-related problems for nearly 4 years so here's my 2c.<p>For most users Google is "muscle memory". It is quite good for most Search needs. The angles of attack that tech-savvy folks think are amazing (category filters, privacy, fancy CoverFlow UX, bigger index - all real differentiators tried by real companies) - most normals don't give a rat's ass about.<p>IMO the only real ways to compete are as follows:<p>a) build something specialized that is several-x better in the specialty (Kayak) b) build something on top of data that Google doesn't have (Facebook Search, whenever it stops sucking) c) go head-to-head with nearly equivalent quality and buy your way in on the CapEx and the Ad/Mktg dollars required to change muscle memory (Bing)<p>Beyond that, most companies have had trouble w/ direct search because Google + Wikipedia gets the job done, by and large. SearchMe? Dead. Kosmix Search? Pivoted successfully before acquisition. Cuil? Dead. Mahalo Search? Pivoted several times away from Search. Qwiki? Pivoted successfully.<p>The sad thing is that Search is such a fun and challenging space with so much work to be done; I want the space to be more competitive but most consumers like the status quo just fine.<p>Lastly - a salute to @yegg for taking this one on. He's a far braver than I, and most others on this thread critiquing his work.

Just for kicks I searched for 'search engine' on Google - once on Chrome(logged into my Google account), and once on Firefox(not logged in). Didn't get Google on the first page on either searche, did get google custom search engine though(which is a completely different thing). Duck Duck Go was in the first page both the times, as were Bing, Yahoo, some engine called Dogpile(never heard of 'em but it was #2 on Chrome), the Wikipedia article for Web search engine and a few other links. There was a list of popular search engines at the bottom of the page in Chrome, DDG wasn't there, but lots other were, and it was compiled from other sources.<p>Don't see much discrimination there. Especially when they don't even list their search engine on the first page<p>Chrome search screenie - <a href="http://goo.gl/HffYt" rel="nofollow">http://goo.gl/HffYt</a> Firefox search screenie - <a href="http://goo.gl/nUe7t" rel="nofollow">http://goo.gl/nUe7t</a>

On chrome, when I right click on the search bar on duckduckgo.com (or any site), I get an option to "Add as search engine...", on clicking it, I get a dialog box for specifying Name, Keyword and URL. What chrome can do is add a checkbox to this dialog box for making it the default search engine.

DDG is my default search engine, I use it every day. It is vastly superior to using Google, and they don't track my searches, I don't really need any better reasons to use it. It is really annoying that I can't easily switch my default search engine in my phone, especially because typing things into the text entry bars basically feeds them straight into Google, which basically publicizes all I do on my phone. I can't stand Chrome as a browser on my laptops, so I don't use it, but if I did I probably would want to be able to switch my search engine as easily as you can in FF. I expect to see antitrust movement soon.

The biggest takeaway is that Google owns duck.com (through acquisition), duck.com pointed to a web page for the company they acquired up until DuckDuckGo made enquiries about potentially getting it, duck.com was then pointed toward google.com. That's probably the biggest dick-move Google has made, and they're perfectly within their rights to do it. It's still a dick-move, Google doesn't need to worry about DDG ever attaining marketshare in a meaningful manner, and DDG have said they're not interested in that.

Current Firefox Nightly uses Google for search when something is typed in the location bar even when a) DuckDuckGo is the default search engine, b) Google is removed from the search engines list completely.<p>Go figure... I've lost all respect for both Mozilla and Google recently.

I am ardent DDG fan,but i cant seem to win over my non-CS buddies to use it,simply because duckduckgo sounds funny&#38; laughable.I wish they could switch to a flashier name.

Safari you have to edit your host file to point yahoo's search to ddg (which i did)

I really like the idea of duckduckgo, but it just doesn't do it for me. As an example, I can't find articles posted in the last hour, let alone the last week (eg. iOS 6 jailbreak).<p>I know it's slightly off topic, but this would certainly encourage me to use this - and I have a community around me that tends to adopt what I do.

It's very disappointing that DDG is resorting to the same whinny PR tactics as the less than savory competitors.<p>It's fairly easy and straight forward to add DDG to Chrome or Android, much easier than other platforms in fact, you’re not being “shut out” because you're not the default engine.

never heard of 'em.

Google's real motto: "Do evil and say don't be evil"