There are still a lot known issues that we're still working through before we can make the transition. I'm sure this thread will uncover more :)
Only one remark: While I like the effect that the full URL shows up when the mouse is above a search entry I would personally prefer to see the full URL all the time. I would be very happy if you could add an option to change that.
90+% I don't need the Why and parsing over it to find the URL is distracting.
- it indicates that there's a fairly thorough recording of searches going on, and acknowledges a reasonable possibility of keypress-by-keypress recording, and
- it doesn't work as well as google's version which accounts for local variation, and which formed part of my decision to reject google in favour of ddg.
Overall this feature creeps me out, in an "uncanny valley" kind of way. It makes me uncomfortable.
http://donttrack.us directly acknowledges that search queries can be used to personally identify individuals.
I therefore understood from the later statement on that site, "[ddg doesn't] store any personal information at all", that this would include search queries: ddg almost literally advertises itself on the fact that it doesn't save search queries. (According to the small print, I understood this wrong.)
It would be a shame if your explanation was the correct one.
I don't follow that DDG not being able to save anonymous queries disregards their stance on privacy?
Surely for the best experience you'd want DDG to do this anonymously.
For example, say I start to type "movie t", it'll see that often times after the word "movie", "times" appears at a high frequency so that could be one of the suggestions. I don't see how this introduces a privacy issue unless they are saving the searches by some personal identification number (whether thats an ip, user id, computer, etc), which they specifically deny. Without the specific identifier, there is no way to say it was user A who searched for "movie times" 300 times in a row and not 300 different users searching for "movie times"
But I want to point out that doing a standard ddg search gives me `https://duckduckgo.com/?q=seattle` , which is a GET command, visible across the entire network as it percolates through, unencrypted.
To state it simple terms: HTTPS protects the URL and all the contents of the connection, but does not protect the fact that you're connecting to a particular domain, the duration of the connection, and the volume of data.
I don't know the best way to do this, but I'm thinking a checkbox somewhere near the search bar, or perhaps a prefix similar to "g!" that'll enable it for any further text that's entered, or something along those lines.
But as another check just revealed, DDG does not seem to index php.net very much, cf. https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=string+inurl%3Aphp.net
It also does not find any php related content for my real name, whereas google does, a lot.
Edit: my bad, it seems to be site: and not inurl:
1) If I search "self storage columbia mo" I get place results but if I "search self storage 65203" I do not get place results. I noticed this does work for food using a more familiar zipcode like 90210.. but maybe still a little zip code work to be done.
2) What about when I search "thai" or "self storage" in general. DuckDuckGo is known for not tracking the user, but if I search something that with location information would most likely provide place results, shouldn't I be given some type of indicator that with just a zipcode or city name I could be given better results? That way you are educating new users while still providing them the results they need and the privacy DuckDuckGo is known for.
Unlike the GP, this bothers me about google as well, though.
I forget the name of the other one, but there's another one similar to this too.
The image and video showcase is well thought out. It is digestible and smooth complement to the general search, well done!
1. I search for "ng angular", which takes me to https://next.duckduckgo.com/?q=ng%20angular
2. I've been to the top link before (http://angular-ui.github.io/ng-grid/).
3. I hover over the 'Visited Site' checkbox icon, and the hover text is obscured by the search area (specifically around the Image and Video tabs).
Overall great job. Looks super clean, I love the image and video dropdowns... keep making it easy for me to use DDG!
Edit: also submitted through your feedback system. Just gotta grab those hacker news points while they're there for the picking right? ;)
1) The checkbox for visited links. However, I think there should be an infobox (visible by default) explaining what it is the first few times you search. A link explaining how it works (for the privacy conscious) would also be good.
Things I don't like:
1) Moving the favicon below the page snippet. I think it should actually be up top and larger, since it's useful for skimming results.
2) Lack of color/contrast. Feels like someone sucked the life out of the site. This is important, because (for example) when I'm skimming results it's helpful to have the page titles (blue) stand out from the snippet (black).
3) Left-aligned results. I find it easier to skim the results when they're centered, rather than left-aligned. This is something people who have been using Google won't notice, but after reading DDG's centered results for a year or so, going back feels jarring, like I'm going out of my way to read them there. The center of the screen seems to be where I look first for content.
4) Larger header. Vertical space is precious, especially when you consider how much is already consumed by an OS menu bar, browser chrome (titlebar, address bar, bookmark bar, tab bar, status bar) and (on Mac OS) the Dock at the bottom of the screen.
Do you think something like that might be possible someday or it completely goes against your philosophy?
EDIT:
Sorry, it looks like it installed the first time. I tried to do a search. It kept using Google. So I thought it didn't install. I tried again. The keyword had already been installed, so it didn't work. Turned out it was already installed and I had to manually set it as my search provider.
As for the rest, as long as the dark/terminal themes still work (there are small bugs), that's fine by me.
one two three four ... one-hundred, two-hundred, three
This auto-complete predictive suggestion list business isn't half bad, but there's nothing I hate more about Google than their bloody "Instant" features.
Immediate disregard seems a little harsh.
My suggestion was to implement such an option.
So I want to search for "apple" and guess what:
I type the letter "a"...
Now the whole page is disrupted, and I have to stop, and check the page, to make sure the sudden change is what I expected it to be. Is the page doing what I intended? I only typed one letter...
Did I actually type the letter "a", or did my finger slip and type the letter "s"? Wait, where's the field? Oh, it's up at the top of the page now... What was I doing? Oh, right, I was going to search for "apple"...
Why did the page change, when I wanted it to stay put, while I complete my thought? Why didn't the page wait until I pressed the enter key, to confirm that I was finished, and ready to search for the intended query?
Do I care about whether the page sends an ordinary post with a form submission, and reloads the page? No.
Do I care about whether the page sends an AJAX request, and is re-rendered by a JavaScript library? No.
I want the page to remain static and reliable while I perform my task. After I'm done typing, it can go crazy, and do whatever.