How likely is for one of these search engines to catch-up technologically to Google's sophistication? I really can't see a clear trajectory for them to compete with Google's quality.
How likely is for one of these search engines to catch-up technologically to Google's sophistication? I really can't see a clear trajectory for them to compete with Google's quality.
I also think that they're "too" clever with their search to their detriment. We tend to think in terms of text search and are looking for results that match what we want. I'd prefer not to have a machine assume I actually intended something else. Just give me great text search where I can perform various inclusions/exclusions and you'll win the market
It's like going to a pub and ordering a steak and getting a burger instead. No, I don't want your damn burger, I am not going to pay for it, I'm just going to try another pub. But wait, there's no pub that delivers what you've actually ordered.
What are you referring to? Not even DDG has their own index.
For example when searching for a persons age, in shows up instantly in a large font on top. When searching for “champions league today”, you will get all soccer games for today neatly presented right inside of Google.
I haven’t seen another search engine that makes accessing this type of information this easy to access. And the sheer amount of widgets and engineering power behind them probably makes it harder to catch up to Google for the small players.
I don't actually look for the widgets or Wikipedia results.
Today, the SRP is ads, the info box, the Reddit-cluster, the Quora-cluster, images, videos, “people also searched…”, “did you mean…”, and somewhere near the bottom a couple of those good ol’ fashioned links for old time sake.
Do not want.
An insightful breakthrough in quality that vastly reduces the computing and engineering required to serve great results that keep up with expanding information, similar to what Google did for search 20 years ago, would be wonderful, but it won’t come from DDG or Brave unless they can develop new models that completely replace their current search products.
The results are not relevant. Either the expectations are not very high, either they do a poor job.
They actually had better search results before using very sofisticated algorithms and trying to outsmart the users.
Most technical aspects of searching were solved and are now common knowledge.
It amazes me why no one is trying to do a better engine. It doesn't have to do everything Google does, it just has to do text search.
Maybe it's hard to get money from search unless you also track users, store their data and sell ads?