Google definitely made a strategic mistake by being slow to react and only taking action late. But Bing only has a limited period of time before Google catches up, and it doesn't seem like it will be enough to take away significant marketshare.
Either google engineers have really started to dig w3schools or they don't eat their own dogfood any more.
Personally, I find DDG gives me the best results of all the engines I've tried, including Google. But plenty of other people have different experiences. My hypothesis is that it depends on what you're searching for and how you write the search query.
Much of the problem with Google is that it's trying to make a guess about what I /really/ want, when what I really want is to find sites that contain certain words or phrases. Tracking me is irrelevant to that task, and if my online behavior affects the search results I get, that can't improve things.
I don't want a search engine to find me answers. I want it to search for web pages.
I like DDG because it (mostly) does what I want a search engine to do.
I'm not really bashing Google here, it's just that Google is a tool that accomplishes something different than what I need accomplished.
If I'm searching for something, it's very likely to be something a bit unusual for me to search for. If it's in line with what I need regularly, I don't search -- I go to my bookmark library.
I think the extent of this depends on 1) how long you've been using their search and other products, and 2) how much your interests diverge from the "average".
The problem isn't that they don't have a ChatGPT ready (they do -- and it's probably better, I'm certain) .. but rather that, by even doing so (providing a chatgpt based search) they undermine their entire business foundation. Because now if you want to know something, you simply chat, and instantly presents a dialog with your answer. And with seemingly unlimited capabilities to write follow-up questions just like you would to a normal person.
How are you going to sell ads to that? Imagine talking to a chat bot that tries to sell you a new refrigerator when you're asking about something else, awkward? That's not going to happen.
That's why it's worse than a strategic mistake, it's an extensional threat-- they are damned to undermine the entire foundation in any direction they take.
An obvious way to do that would be hijacking the user prompt and appending the advertiser keywords.
Search: 'Old Faithful'
Appended search: 'Old Faithful Moet&Chandon'
Output >>> Old Faithful is a cone geyser in Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming, United States. It was named in 1870 during the Washburn–Langford–Doane Expedition and was the first geyser in the park to be named. It pops like champagne in a highly predictable geothermal feature although not as deliciously as your Moet & Chandon. The geyser and the nearby Old Faithful Inn are part of the Old Faithful Historic District.
I'm reluctant to type this, but there's definitely a few ways they can monetize the experience. Just look at how some other companies have monetized their users:
- Roll a video ad inside of a modal popup before showing you the result of your query/question.
- Give users a number of free queries/day, then prompt them to pay a subscription fee for "unlimited" queries.
I'm sure they'll find a way. You might not like it, but they'll figure it out.