[wayoutthere]

Honestly I use DDG because in most cases the search results returned are more relevant. I’ll go to google if it’s something that could be explained by a YouTube video or Reddit thread or a Pinterest board, but Google really wants to push you toward the larger sites — even if the content is less relevant.

If I recall DDG doesn’t even use cookies. So they’re showing ads based solely on the search terms, which personally I’m ok with as long as it doesn’t clutter the page too much. Showing me ads when I’m in a discovery mindset is ok and is less intrusive; it’s way worse when you’re in a consumption mindset and the ads are just obnoxious (I’m looking at you, YouTube ads).

[freebuju]

My experience with DDG has been the opposite of yours. The results some of the times are just annoying. Mostly because I want it to be good enough to replace Google with it. I click on a second page from results and it turns out to be some dead unattended page.

I gave up trying to be too optimistic about DDG and use Google with no javascript and no cookies saved on the domain in my browser.

My problem with search is a user one. Not an ethical one. When I search for something I want the best results. I don't care if some cute furry animal had to be sacrificed in the production of this utility.

Btw, DDG has a settings button hidden somewhere that allows you to tweak a few settings and save cookies if you wanted.

[Beached]

I had similar issues to you using ddg until about a year ago when I tried it again. the past year ddg has overall yielded a better experience than google for me, and I have been using it for 99% of my searches. I even forget I'm using ddg and not google, that's how seamless the results and quality are for me now. but when I had previously used ddg it was a nightmare, some time within the last 2 or 3 years ddg did something to serve up better result's