- Startpage was founded in 2006, in the Netherlands by Robert E.G. Beens and David Bodnick the founder of metasearch engine Ixquick (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Startpage.com)
VS. DuckDuckGo (DDG) was founded in 2008, in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania by Gabriel Weinberg who previously founded Names Database (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_Database).
- HQ'd in the Netherlands ensuring worldwide users are protected by stringent EU and Dutch privacy legislation
VS. DDG based in the United States
- Startpage provides Google results
VS. DDG provides primarily Yahoo and BING results
- Startpage offers Anonymous View, a proprietary feature that lets users browse their search results privately via a protective proxy
VS. DDG does not have this feature, but has done well to design an intuitive and attractive experience.
---
You haven't described an advantage with this reply. Or, at least, reasoning why you believe it's an advantage.
Plus star page has super useful anonimized view. It's essentially anon proxy built into search page. It's useful if you have to go look trough doggy websites.
This doesn't help. A lot of people believe things which don't always hold up to scrutiny.
When you asked for support for the assertion, it was given, but you continued to disagree.
However, for people who prefer Google, using Google results is an advantage. You seem to be working under some stronger definition of advantage (for example: "an advantage is only an advantage of everyone agrees it is am advantage"), and such advantages are rare enough to be an unreasonable requirement.
>When you asked for support for the assertion, it was given, but you continued to disagree.
The "support" that the other poster submitted was: "Most people believe (at least as far as I know them) ..."
I don't suspect many folks would accept that as anything more than anecdotal.
>However, for people who prefer Google, using Google results is an advantage. You seem to be working under some stronger definition of advantage (for example: "an advantage is only an advantage of everyone agrees it is am advantage"), and such advantages are rare enough to be an unreasonable requirement.
Look, I get it, you like Google. You work for Google. That's all well and good. You're argument(s) toward me come off as a bit defensive, however. There was a baseless assertion given in response to someone asking for information and I called that into question.
My arguments here aren't for or against Google, but in support of substantive dissemination of information which the original comment I replied to was not.
Startpage has an advantage over ddg because some people prefer Google search results.
Equally, ddg has an advantage over startpage because some people prefer being results or prefer to not use Google.
It doesn't matter if even a single person prefers Google to bing. For that single person, startpage has an advantage. The reverse of this is again, also true. Anecdotal evidence is, in this case, more than enough to justify the assertion.[0] That is, unless you're working under some unusually strong definition of advantage. Which I'll note you still haven't provided. Instead of, perhaps, saying "yes I don't consider a relative advantage that applies only to a potentially small group of people to be an advantage", you took the opportunity to make irrelevant attacks on my character.
[0]: if you want non anecdotal evidence though: both have users. This implies each has a relative advantage over the other to some subset of the population, otherwise one would take all the users from that other.
Of the group of people I know, that are even aware that there are other search engines than google (most people just think google homepage is "the web/internet"), most of them think that google is better than bing.
Is it true ? Depends on whom and for for what. For technical questions i mostly get similar results. But for local questions (i am in small country in eu), google is a lot better than bing.