Does anyone else find that they've been trained by Google's positioning of sponsored links into ignoring the first few links on a search page? I bring it up because on the Duck Duck Go search page, I missed the link to Hacker News the first couple times I looked. I was so conditioned by Google's sponsored link placement, I was treating the third link as if it was the first.
EDIT: Okay, I really don't like the positioning of the "official site" result. To me, it should be below the sponsored links, not above. The reason is that when you're searching for something where DDG doesn't have an "official site" entry, the first search result appears below the sponsored links. However, when DDG knows the "official site" for your search query, it places that result above the sponsored links. In practice, this means that you have to look in two places for the "first" result - above the sponsored links and below. Placing the "official site" result below the sponsored links would resolve this inconsistency.
We've been fighting against this problem since we first launched. Our zero-click box has gone through several iterations with it in mind, and people kept skipping over it. This latest iteration I think (from user testing) does the best job so far of combating that unconscious inclination.
That's interesting on official site placement. We thought it would be better for the user to put that official site link first (it's also in the zero-click info box btw). But it people think it should be below, I have no problem with that.
I'd say one big reason I missed it at first was because there was no hacker news little orange [Y] box on the left side of the link. Scrolling further down the page, this logo appears on the second iteration of the HN link.
That seemed strange, so I did the search [chocolate of the month club] on DuckDuckGo and clicked on the Microsoft ad. I ended up on http://www.amazingchocolateclub.com/?utm_source=MSN&utm_... which has "chocolate of the month club" in the url.
It looks like the "icep_uq" parameter in the ebay link has exactly my search query, [one fruit a month]?
I know you've made "we don't send your searches to other sites" a pretty major policy at http://donttrack.us/ . With these ads, do you know whether searches on DuckDuckGo are sometimes sent to other sites?
Thanks Matt. I removed that block while I investigate, and will report back when I know more. It's obviously not our intention to leak any search results through us.
Edit: still reviewing to make sure, but it appears that it isn't sending the search term via us. In fact, that's why it is going through our server, to specifically strip out the referrer. This appears to be an optional setting in the Microsoft ad center that sends the keyword bid for that ad.
Edit2: that does appear to be it. If I take all your examples and append ssn to the query, ssn doesn't appear in the resulting URL. I'm guessing they just have broad match on for those terms. You probably know as well as anyone that the coverage in the query space for ad terms is pretty wide, so if you search for something near the head you're bound to hit something exactly. I also tried a bunch of other queries, and since this setting is optional a lot of times the advertiser didn't set it and so their bid term is not send back; this is the case for example if I search for google and up at https://www.google.com/chrome?hl=en&brand=CHFX&utm_c...
I have to say, why such loud mouseover effects? It's distracting to have all these boxes popping in and out as I scroll through the results. I get that you're trying to show that the click area is that big, but it impairs readability--most of the time while using a search engine I am reading very quickly. Perhaps some people leave their mouse off to the side when they scroll, but many people "think with their mouse," pointing at stuff as they look at it.
I would personally tone them down to just the underline appearing on the result link (where that activates for the big click area, and not just when mousing over the link within the big click area).
I don't mind it. I think the biggest problem is that it uses JavaScript. The small delay between hover and style change makes the site feel sluggish. Using the :hover pseudo class would be better, and is supported by all browsers other than IE6.
I definitely agree with this although I think you could lighten the shading and get away with the current method. The dark grey just creates too much of a contrast change for me to read it easily. It only adds a split second to my reading time, but it is noticeable.
I also don't really like the boxes/buttons at the top (they look very much like every other site trying to create a mickey mouse design), but this is probably just my natural resistance to change. I probably won't even notice in a week.
I changed to DDG a while back as my default search engine and must say that I've been extremely happy with it. To hear about an interface upgrade was initially a little upsetting as it brings to mind the recent changes to Google. The preview and instant search features are what finally pushed me to the simplicity of DDG. I'm glad you kept the same clean design and didn't try to change what already works wonderfully. Please keep up the great work.
Great work Gabriel. I've just switched to DDG as my default search engine. A few suggestions though:
The divider between the search and drop down buttons should use alpha-blended colors rather than dotted lines. It looks really bad in some situations, for example the :active state on the drop down button looks like it doesn't darken the divider. Edit Just noticed the down state on the front page search button is actually a pixel off. The down arrow also dips a pixel on active state.
The :active state on the more button is missing the last few pixels at the bottom.
The results don't have padding to the right. When a result is highlighted the description text can run all the way to the right border. Also see the "Internet search engines" hover state for q=DuckDuckGo.
Consider packaging your image resources into sprite sheets (check out http://spriteme.org/). There are flickers when I use some elements for the first time. Most noticeably the :hover state for the search suggestions and toggling the plus/minus button. Clear your cache to see them.
The top box has some padding issues when hovering the contained links: there's more padding on the left than on the right, and the first link has more padding on the right than the next two (tested in latest stable Chrome & Firefox). See screenshot: http://polyprograms.free.fr/tmp/DuckDuckGoPaddingTopBox.png
On an unrelated note: I have a hard time taking your service seriously because of the duck branding and the DuckDuckGo name. It looks like you're doing a great job but somehow DuckDuckGo doesn't feel like a name for something I would use on a day-to-day basis. I guess I can just overlook it if the service is good enough but I do wonder if your brand is hurting your service. Maybe it's just me though!
But "google" is pretty normal, right? Or "yahoo?" Or "bing?"
Your point is well-taken, but I think it's just a matter of normalizing the name. Granted, "duck, duck, go" doesn't roll off the tongue as smoothly as the other services, but I'm not sure that's a critical issue.
We've started calling it ddg among my friends, it has a nice ring to it, to bad they don't have a url using this acronym since it's also very fast to type.
Made DDG my default search engine in Chrome today. Not because of the redesign, but just because I think it's time to start looking at alternatives. (The fact that I don't even need to qualify what I'm seeking an alternative to means I should be looking at alternatives!)
I think the "Official Site" buttons should be made more prominent and to look more like an official seal. I just pulled a random image out of Google Images to try and explain what I mean:
Love the new look. One thing I want to bring up is page load speed. I went 2 weeks with DDG as my default search engine for all browsers but I had to switch back because of the difference in page load speed. Its just .5-1 second slower then Google and I cannot stand it.
I would find the results to be fine, and the interface to be good but the fact I had to wait slightly longer drove me absolutely up the wall.
I tried a DDG experiment on my home machine and after 6 weeks or so I switched back to Google. Sometimes DDG was almost as fast as my thought process but very often I found myself waiting several seconds for search results.
It sounds trivial but those were very, very long seconds. When I'm in the middle of a deep programming problem I need an answer now while it's still fresh in my mind. Giving me 2 seconds for my mind to wander off is too much.
Another problem that I had was that there was no way to sort my results. However, that looks to be solved with the latest DDG interface. :)
For a second, I thought : "Bad choice for an example query. It doesn't even finds the real HN."
Turns out Google has trained me to scroll past anything looking like a Sponsored link a bit too well.. It took me a few seconds to spot the "Official Site" link.
The best thing about DDG that it's very configurable. Many commenters here complaining about things they could easily change in the settings menu, like colors, advertisements, floating header, results placed in the middle, etc.
I really hope people stop copying the Google/microsoft "big block color squares" UI strategy. Please copy Apple more, gradients and buttons that stand out nicely and perfectly rounded corners. Things which pop out of the screen nicely.
The new UI has a lot of really nice touches, and is a lot cleaner than it used to be. Kudos for that. The magnifying glass and menu arrow in the header are gorgeous, I love the dotted line between the two. Really nice.
That said, there are a lot of issues, in my opinion. Clicking that menu arrow pops out a really bland box with no padding and no structure to the content. The "header" text is wrapped in dashes, but the text looks exactly the same as the rest of the text in the box. Like someone else said, the mouseover effect on the individual results is really harsh. The zero-click box at the top fades in to the background, and the sponsored link is intrusive and throws off the flow of the entire page.
I hope you folks keep working, because the progress I've seen in the last couple years has really been great and I want DDG to be a huge success. Search is completely ripe for disruption - Google got simplicity right, but most of their recent updates have been boring or steps backwards. Keep fighting the good fight. And if you're ever looking to hire a UI / UX designer, let me know where to apply. :)
How do you determine what makes something an "official site"? I see it with the "Hacker News" search here, and with Twilio for example, but not with Fog Creek or Ford.
You guys keep doing awesome work Gabriel, keep it up!
The positioning of sponsored links makes me very sad. I use j/k/enter to navigate most of the time, and this means that I need to worry about accidentally selecting a link with a near-100% probability of being completely useless to me. (It's really annoying when it's the first link, because I can't just press 'enter' to go to it.)
It also wastes a lot of screen space on a smaller screen, especially when the zero-click info box is there. Being able to see only 1-2 useful results instead of 2-3 is annoying.
I've been using DDG for over a year now as my primary search engine, and I like it quite a lot. I understand the need to make money, but I'm going to be very sad if I have to go find a new search engine because ads have compromised the UI.
The previous ads on the right were taking up more space than this new sponsored link and they weren't being seen much, resulting in essentially zero effectiveness. Additionally, we continually get requests for actually having sponsored links in-line because when relevant they often add something to the result set.
So what we hoped to do is kill three birds with one stone: a) add in a relevant sponsored link (work in progress); b) generate real revenue to make the service self-sustainable (while still keeping it as minimal as possible); c) reclaim the space on the right side for more interesting interactions (more to come).
We've been testing this for a while on some traffic and it has preformed well with essentially zero complaint. We realize there will be some people who don't want it, which is why there is a setting to turn if off (ad block works too).
Also, the whole page has been compressed up so really it shouldn't be taking much more vertical space. In other words, with the smaller default fonts and other spacing changes that height has been removed from the page rendering it more of a wash with # of results on the page.
I love the new design. I preferred the old color scheme (light green feels easier on the eyes), but I'm sure I'll quickly get used to the new one. Other than that, everything seems much more consistently designed and cleaner. Great job.
PS. I've been trying out DDG for a while and switched over almost completely in the last few months. I find increasingly fewer searches for which I need to jump over to Google, too. Even better, once I explained to my dad how DDG was different than other search engines, he WANTED me to switch his computer to DDG. I predict 2012 is going to be a heckuva year for y'all!
I guess the new color scheme must be their secret way of pointing us to the color customization page. And also an underhanded way to get us to accept their cookies :)
Well the main page is good but the search results are still overcrowded. The hover-effect on the search results is distracting. It just diverts attention from the results. I doubt many people really read like this: "hover mouse over first result: Not it. Ok, up to the next one: Hover mouse over second result. Not it. Ok next one."
Then of course, it bothers me that I have to pay attention to where I click, and if I want to copy paste text, I have to be exact about it, otherwise I accidentally click on whitespace that will direct me to a result page.
It's just too much "cognitive work" associated with the UI.
[+] [-] quanticle|14 years ago|reply
EDIT: Okay, I really don't like the positioning of the "official site" result. To me, it should be below the sponsored links, not above. The reason is that when you're searching for something where DDG doesn't have an "official site" entry, the first search result appears below the sponsored links. However, when DDG knows the "official site" for your search query, it places that result above the sponsored links. In practice, this means that you have to look in two places for the "first" result - above the sponsored links and below. Placing the "official site" result below the sponsored links would resolve this inconsistency.
[+] [-] epi0Bauqu|14 years ago|reply
That's interesting on official site placement. We thought it would be better for the user to put that official site link first (it's also in the zero-click info box btw). But it people think it should be below, I have no problem with that.
[+] [-] m_for_monkey|14 years ago|reply
I, personally, wouldn't mind the sponsored links if only they were relevant. Of course, if they were relevant, sponsoring wouldn't be necessary.
[+] [-] ImprovedSilence|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Matt_Cutts|14 years ago|reply
This was the first time that I've seen MSN ads, so I did a search for flowers and clicked on the ad I got. I landed on the url: http://ww11.1800flowers.com/collection.do?dataset=11385&... which has the word "Flowers" in the url.
That seemed strange, so I did the search [chocolate of the month club] on DuckDuckGo and clicked on the Microsoft ad. I ended up on http://www.amazingchocolateclub.com/?utm_source=MSN&utm_... which has "chocolate of the month club" in the url.
I tried some more esoteric searches. The search [one fruit a month] returned an ebay link http://duckduckgo.com/k/?u=http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711...
It looks like the "icep_uq" parameter in the ebay link has exactly my search query, [one fruit a month]?
I know you've made "we don't send your searches to other sites" a pretty major policy at http://donttrack.us/ . With these ads, do you know whether searches on DuckDuckGo are sometimes sent to other sites?
[+] [-] epi0Bauqu|14 years ago|reply
Edit: still reviewing to make sure, but it appears that it isn't sending the search term via us. In fact, that's why it is going through our server, to specifically strip out the referrer. This appears to be an optional setting in the Microsoft ad center that sends the keyword bid for that ad.
Edit2: that does appear to be it. If I take all your examples and append ssn to the query, ssn doesn't appear in the resulting URL. I'm guessing they just have broad match on for those terms. You probably know as well as anyone that the coverage in the query space for ad terms is pretty wide, so if you search for something near the head you're bound to hit something exactly. I also tried a bunch of other queries, and since this setting is optional a lot of times the advertiser didn't set it and so their bid term is not send back; this is the case for example if I search for google and up at https://www.google.com/chrome?hl=en&brand=CHFX&utm_c...
[+] [-] pak|14 years ago|reply
I would personally tone them down to just the underline appearing on the result link (where that activates for the big click area, and not just when mousing over the link within the big click area).
[+] [-] achompas|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] underwater|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zcid|14 years ago|reply
I also don't really like the boxes/buttons at the top (they look very much like every other site trying to create a mickey mouse design), but this is probably just my natural resistance to change. I probably won't even notice in a week.
I changed to DDG a while back as my default search engine and must say that I've been extremely happy with it. To hear about an interface upgrade was initially a little upsetting as it brings to mind the recent changes to Google. The preview and instant search features are what finally pushed me to the simplicity of DDG. I'm glad you kept the same clean design and didn't try to change what already works wonderfully. Please keep up the great work.
[+] [-] mkl|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] underwater|14 years ago|reply
The divider between the search and drop down buttons should use alpha-blended colors rather than dotted lines. It looks really bad in some situations, for example the :active state on the drop down button looks like it doesn't darken the divider. Edit Just noticed the down state on the front page search button is actually a pixel off. The down arrow also dips a pixel on active state.
The :active state on the more button is missing the last few pixels at the bottom.
The results don't have padding to the right. When a result is highlighted the description text can run all the way to the right border. Also see the "Internet search engines" hover state for q=DuckDuckGo.
Consider packaging your image resources into sprite sheets (check out http://spriteme.org/). There are flickers when I use some elements for the first time. Most noticeably the :hover state for the search suggestions and toggling the plus/minus button. Clear your cache to see them.
[+] [-] epi0Bauqu|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] elisee|14 years ago|reply
The top box has some padding issues when hovering the contained links: there's more padding on the left than on the right, and the first link has more padding on the right than the next two (tested in latest stable Chrome & Firefox). See screenshot: http://polyprograms.free.fr/tmp/DuckDuckGoPaddingTopBox.png
On an unrelated note: I have a hard time taking your service seriously because of the duck branding and the DuckDuckGo name. It looks like you're doing a great job but somehow DuckDuckGo doesn't feel like a name for something I would use on a day-to-day basis. I guess I can just overlook it if the service is good enough but I do wonder if your brand is hurting your service. Maybe it's just me though!
[+] [-] omaranto|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] epi0Bauqu|14 years ago|reply
We've had endless brand name discussions from the beginning :). So duly noted!
[+] [-] losvedir|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bmj|14 years ago|reply
Your point is well-taken, but I think it's just a matter of normalizing the name. Granted, "duck, duck, go" doesn't roll off the tongue as smoothly as the other services, but I'm not sure that's a critical issue.
[+] [-] landhar|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] newobj|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mike-cardwell|14 years ago|reply
http://www.anythinglefthanded.co.uk/images/certificate.jpg
The golden icon in the bottom left of that image. Something like that.
[+] [-] zach|14 years ago|reply
The gold seal/blue ribbon idea is a good one but may disrupt the very-text-based rhythm of this page.
[+] [-] peregrine|14 years ago|reply
I would find the results to be fine, and the interface to be good but the fact I had to wait slightly longer drove me absolutely up the wall.
[+] [-] Corrado|14 years ago|reply
It sounds trivial but those were very, very long seconds. When I'm in the middle of a deep programming problem I need an answer now while it's still fresh in my mind. Giving me 2 seconds for my mind to wander off is too much.
Another problem that I had was that there was no way to sort my results. However, that looks to be solved with the latest DDG interface. :)
Get the speed up and I'll be back!
[+] [-] epi0Bauqu|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Wilya|14 years ago|reply
Turns out Google has trained me to scroll past anything looking like a Sponsored link a bit too well.. It took me a few seconds to spot the "Official Site" link.
[+] [-] m_for_monkey|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shaggy|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aquark|14 years ago|reply
Recently I've noticed that I am consistently missing some of DDG's features when still using Google so it must be time to switch over everywhere.
[+] [-] draggnar|14 years ago|reply
Also if you don't like the colors everything is customizable in the settings. I switched the search results width to wide which is quite nice.
[+] [-] faboo|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brador|14 years ago|reply
I really hope people stop copying the Google/microsoft "big block color squares" UI strategy. Please copy Apple more, gradients and buttons that stand out nicely and perfectly rounded corners. Things which pop out of the screen nicely.
[+] [-] 54mf|14 years ago|reply
That said, there are a lot of issues, in my opinion. Clicking that menu arrow pops out a really bland box with no padding and no structure to the content. The "header" text is wrapped in dashes, but the text looks exactly the same as the rest of the text in the box. Like someone else said, the mouseover effect on the individual results is really harsh. The zero-click box at the top fades in to the background, and the sponsored link is intrusive and throws off the flow of the entire page.
I hope you folks keep working, because the progress I've seen in the last couple years has really been great and I want DDG to be a huge success. Search is completely ripe for disruption - Google got simplicity right, but most of their recent updates have been boring or steps backwards. Keep fighting the good fight. And if you're ever looking to hire a UI / UX designer, let me know where to apply. :)
[+] [-] duck|14 years ago|reply
You guys keep doing awesome work Gabriel, keep it up!
[+] [-] Wilya|14 years ago|reply
DBpedia [1], for example, seems to have nicely formatted dumps of all infoboxes.
[1] http://wiki.dbpedia.org/Datasets
[+] [-] ______|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] larrys|14 years ago|reply
http://help.duckduckgo.com/customer/portal/articles/216405-m...
Gabriel, how does someone purchase a sponsored link?
Edit: Appears that this is going through msn if you look at the URL that is generated.
[+] [-] epi0Bauqu|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] samdk|14 years ago|reply
It also wastes a lot of screen space on a smaller screen, especially when the zero-click info box is there. Being able to see only 1-2 useful results instead of 2-3 is annoying.
I've been using DDG for over a year now as my primary search engine, and I like it quite a lot. I understand the need to make money, but I'm going to be very sad if I have to go find a new search engine because ads have compromised the UI.
[+] [-] epi0Bauqu|14 years ago|reply
So what we hoped to do is kill three birds with one stone: a) add in a relevant sponsored link (work in progress); b) generate real revenue to make the service self-sustainable (while still keeping it as minimal as possible); c) reclaim the space on the right side for more interesting interactions (more to come).
We've been testing this for a while on some traffic and it has preformed well with essentially zero complaint. We realize there will be some people who don't want it, which is why there is a setting to turn if off (ad block works too).
Also, the whole page has been compressed up so really it shouldn't be taking much more vertical space. In other words, with the smaller default fonts and other spacing changes that height has been removed from the page rendering it more of a wash with # of results on the page.
[+] [-] sequoia|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rkudeshi|14 years ago|reply
PS. I've been trying out DDG for a while and switched over almost completely in the last few months. I find increasingly fewer searches for which I need to jump over to Google, too. Even better, once I explained to my dad how DDG was different than other search engines, he WANTED me to switch his computer to DDG. I predict 2012 is going to be a heckuva year for y'all!
[+] [-] ufo|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Meai|14 years ago|reply
Then of course, it bothers me that I have to pay attention to where I click, and if I want to copy paste text, I have to be exact about it, otherwise I accidentally click on whitespace that will direct me to a result page.
It's just too much "cognitive work" associated with the UI.