Ink, Bits, & Pixels: intérêt et limites de DuckDuckGO

27Avr15

Un point sur les limites de DDG:

• DDG ne permet pas l’utilisation des guillemets « à la Google » donc la recherche sur une chaîne de mots
• ne permet pas d’éliminer les suggestions de mots similaires faites par le moteur
• n’affiche ni ne gère la date de mise en ligne d’un résultat
• et cetera: voir après le saut…

As much as I like DDG, it’s still missing certain search delimiters and there are whole swaths of types of search results which DDG simply cannot find.

For example:

• DuckDuckGo ignores literal strings. Wrap a piece of text in « quotes » and Google will look for the string. DDG will look for the individual words.
• It sometimes assumes I meant to search for a term similar to what I typed rather than the actual term. I am then shown the results for the similar search term with no way to switch the results to what I was really looking for. This is especially frustrating when I am looking for someone by name.
• The search engine doesn’t seem to realize that when I look for a company’s name and the word logo, I want that company’s logo. DDG instead shows results for the company’s name and for the word logo.
• DuckDuckGo doesn’t show the date when a search result was published, or offer time constraint as a search delimiter. This deprives me of a useful tool for sorting for relevant results.
• And , DuckDuckGo is generally pretty useless at finding current or topical news stories.

I do like DDG because it’s not Google (and for other reasons), but its shortcomings aren’t just interesting quirks. There are times where it has failed (and will continue to fail) to return usable results, when no amount of tweaking the search terms will fix it.

When that happens I have to go back to Google.

via DuckDuckGo(ogle) | Ink, Bits, & Pixels.

Filed under: Google, moteurs de recherche, veille   |  2 Comments
Étiquettes : DuckDuckGo, Google