@rosenjcb to TechnologyEnglish • 2 years agoYou cant even avoid irrelevant results with "site:" anymoremessage-square141arrow-up1645arrow-down166
arrow-up1579arrow-down1message-squareYou cant even avoid irrelevant results with "site:" anymore@rosenjcb to TechnologyEnglish • 2 years agomessage-square141
minus-squareQwerty-SpacelinkEnglish4•edit-22 years agoSame here. DDG is so much better. And I love that I can do !mcwiki diamond to search the minecraft wiki for “diamonds” I ended up switching because Google changed their image search design that was just so much more difficult to browse
minus-square@scutigerlinkEnglish2•2 years agoMy problem with ddg is that I can’t refine my search by excluding keywords, only by adding more. For example, it’s frustrating if I’m looking to buy a product locally and half the page is Amazon results.
minus-square@mundanelinkEnglish1•edit-22 years agoIf I add -amazon to the query on ddg I don’t get any Amazon results. Is this not the case for you?
minus-square@mundanelinkEnglish1•2 years agoThat is weird. I wonder why we are seeing so different behavior from ddg.
minus-squareQwerty-SpacelinkEnglish1•2 years agoYou can do that on ddg. See this link: http://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/results/syntax
Same here. DDG is so much better. And I love that I can do
!mcwiki diamondto search the minecraft wiki for “diamonds”I ended up switching because Google changed their image search design that was just so much more difficult to browse
My problem with ddg is that I can’t refine my search by excluding keywords, only by adding more. For example, it’s frustrating if I’m looking to buy a product locally and half the page is Amazon results.
If I add
-amazonto the query on ddg I don’t get any Amazon results. Is this not the case for you?It is not. It works fine for google, but not for DDG.
That is weird. I wonder why we are seeing so different behavior from ddg.
You can do that on ddg. See this link: http://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/results/syntax