News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Announcing Duck It, a new way to search. Parent comment

Re:Announcing Duck It, a new way to search by cookiecaper on Tuesday November 03, 2009 @02:17PM (#920019)
The real problem with "Duck Duck Go" is that it's too long and not easily verbed. You'll notice everyone is going for the easily verbed names because they're marketable and great.

I used Duck Duck Go for a month or so earlier this year. I liked it and thought it was awesome for general queries like movie or person names but pretty bad for text searches, like error messages. For this reason, I returned to Google. I also thought there were way too many "Search on these sites..." icons for that to be useful in any way; if Google was easily searched from there with just a click, I may not have changed back.

Most people don't like the name "Duck Duck Go", and it's too long, I think. Guy should rebrand it into something similar but under two syllables.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Announcing Duck It, a new way to search by felideon on Tuesday November 03, 2009 @02:31PM (#920042)
There was a blog post recently on naming your startup where I think the author had a good point on looking for names that can be "verbed": don't worry, people will find a way.

In this case, they've made their verb obvious: Duck It. Pretty easy, no?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Announcing Duck It, a new way to search by nostrademons on Tuesday November 03, 2009 @06:58PM (#920552)
When someone says "Just Duck It", though, I always think they got their consonants wrong and want me to give up.

"Bing" has similar issues - is the past tense "bang"? "I bang her on the Internet"?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Announcing Duck It, a new way to search by LogicHoleFlaw on Tuesday November 03, 2009 @08:09PM (#920666)
Pretty sure the past tense is "bung."

Not that this is much of an improvement.

[ Parent | on HN ]