I remember google having vastly more useful results than its competitors at that time. The uncluttered design was a bonus.
Before people figured out how to game PageRank, Google was spooky. Unreal. Incredibly good results.
Re:DuckDuckGo Raises $10M
by mlthoughts2018 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @08:56PM
(#17864306)
I remember google having equivalent or even inferior results to yahoo search for quite a while, especially in niche topics like sports and music. The differences in algorithms just didn’t matter much for average case queries.
I think the difference in algorithms matters even less now, and that google’s modern advantage is not in ranking algorithms but in automated display of structured data, like sports league results, filmography for an actor, etc., and work around knowledge graph methods to automate that stuff.
Early google was unequivocally only differentiated by branding and sparse design.
Re:DuckDuckGo Raises $10M
by lettergram on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @09:19PM
(#17864467)
I actually postulate it was due to their ability to parse queries in an effective way, combined with the speed (and sure, probably design) of results [1]. From what I recall at the time, and even to this day, Google does a better job of determine exact match vs question (and finding subject matter) based results.
Re:DuckDuckGo Raises $10M
by devmunchies on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @02:02PM
(#17870280)
Yes. Their NLP is unparalleled. I'd say the uncluttered UI, query parsing, and search algorithm were all the major factors.
"That's why I used Altavista before that. Google kept things very simple while other sites loaded on the bloat and garbage."
It wasn't just the simplicity. Google was also a lot faster, and had no ads!
How ironic that advertisement later became their bread and butter.
Re:DuckDuckGo Raises $10M
by TheGrassyKnoll on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @10:22PM
(#17864922)
Yes. It was clean AND fast when the rest of the internet was pretty clunky in the late 90's.
I think that speed investment paid off HUGELY.
I was quite young at the time but made the same transition for the same reasons.
I think the vast majority of users don't consciously evaluate search engines for accuracy. And most non-technical users just assume that if they cant find it through X, its probably not there.
That's why I used Altavista before that. Google kept things very simple while other sites loaded on the bloat and garbage.
I don't remember ever feeling like what I found with Google couldn't be found with Altavista or lycos. But a lot of the other companies tried to prematurely monetize to an excessive degree.