HN Explorer

Ask HN: Are there valid Google Search alternatives?

28 points by lnrd ↗ HN
Google Search is broken. I wanted a list of the most popular text editors for writers. I searched "best mac text editors" and of course all articles are about code editors, silly me. I then searched "best mac text editors for writing" and Google just spits out same results, a bunch of listicles about VScode vs VIM. Completely ignoring the "for writing" part of my Search (not excluding the term, just giving irrelevant results).

It has become so comically bad that I would be surprised there is not some cool startup out there trying to reinvent a Search that just works. Any hints?

76 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 133 ms ] thread
[deleted]
(comment deleted)
hilbert42
I can't agree more, Google just doesn't cut it anymore, it's pretty terrible these days.

As well as DuckDuckGo I use StartPage, https://www.startpage.com/, and Mojeek, https://www.mojeek.com/, they're not a universal panacea but they often find items that Google doesn't find. I'm surprised how good they can be given they're much smaller operations.

The secret is to break the habit of using only one search engine. To save time I use multiple browsers with a different search engine as homepage on each. Moving between each is quick and easy.

Using multiple browsers also reduces tracking/fingerprinting, etc.

Unfrozen0688
>The secret is to break the habit of using only one search engine. To save time I use multiple browsers with a different search engine as homepage on each. Moving between each is quick and easy.

As a tip, checkout DDG Bangs

https://duckduckgo.com/bangs eg type "jazz music!yt" and it will do a youtube search, !s for startpage, !g for google etc

hilbert42
Thanks for the info. Great idea, will try it. Likely very useful. What I didn't say in the first post was that some browsers have JS turned off (I normally run that way), so I switch browsers on-the-fly when JS is absolutely necessary (some have other switches as well). Still, it ought to integrate well into at least one of my browsers (there are five on this phone).
ctvo
Pay for Kagi. It's worth it.
huhtenberg
Gave it a try some time ago and it was at Bing's level in terms of the search quality. Even simple queries for something as trivial like (Windows) API function names came back with a lot of noise and junk as a top result. Less trivial stuff was worse. I love the idea behind it, but it's not a real alternative for Google, not yet.
nvarsj
Been using Kagi now for a couple months and overall find it better than G. G also returned lots of rubbish depending on the query. At least in Kagi I can blacklist obvious SEO spam sites and never see them again.
[deleted]
(comment deleted)
elektor
That's the beauty of Kagi, you can hide and downrank the noise and junk websites so that you only get the high-quality domains you're looking for.
dharmab
Did you use the custom ranking feature? Pin the official docs, raise good sources, lower or block bad ones.
huhtenberg
Well, no. I expected the search engine to give relevant results right off the bat.
LordGrey
I had switched from Google to DDG years. DDG seemed to be marginally better at the time, but I really switched because DDG was not Google. Google had become annoying.

About six months ago I tried Kagi, then I signed up with them. Kagi delivers what I want: Fast, accurate search results that I can tweak. I'm a huge fan at this point.

The only time I don't use Kagi is if I'm running incognito over VPN, so I use another search engine (DDG or Bing) that I don't have to sign in to.

kodapoda
Not sure if you are aware - you can use Kagi in incognito too. Kagi can generate a link with a token that won't require you to sign in. Their official desktop and mobile extensions handle this case once you generate the access token. I only use private mode in iOS Safari and Kagi works as expected.
furyofantares
I've been happily paying for kagi for over a year now.
rc_mob
duck duck go and kagi are the only 2 real options

i pay the 10 for kagi and I'm happy with it. tons of ability to customize searches

Lazare
Kagi is great if you're willing to pay. DuckDuckGo is...okay if you aren't.
necroforest
Maybe "best word processor for mac" is a better search for you?
throwaway237289
I think that "for writing" is incredibly generic and a terrible search term. If you were talking to a human being about this, and you clarified that you weren't simply looking for text editors, but text editors "for writing", I would tell you that you hadn't clarified anything at all. Do you think one doesn't "write code"?

You might as well had said "for typing". And even THAT might have implied voice vs keyboard.

kodapoda
The (reasonable—IMO) expectation here is that search engines should be smart enough to understand queries like that. Even Google used to be better at that, until they succumbed to other priorities.
ximeng
Yandex gave relevant results for me for your query
Unfrozen0688
No need to pay for Kagi imo

https://search.brave.com/

+ Own crawler!

+ Nice summary AI

+ Discussion section with Reddit/Spiceworks etc answers

- Bangs work but not as good as ddg

- crypto company, just feels shady

- Ads

https://www.startpage.com/

+ Proxied Google results but sometimes you need that

- Owned by AD company

https://duckduckgo.com/

+Bing + own crawler

+Long running private search

+Bangs!! https://duckduckgo.com/bangs eg type "jazz music!yt" and it will do a youtube search, !s for startpage, !g for google etc

-Relies on Bing

-Ads but can be turned off

https://you.com/ - Combined ChatGPT and web search

sshine
Funny how “No need to pay for Kagi” is followed by three alternatives for which the downsides all list “– ads”.

I have the opinion that I’m paying for search one way or the other. I’d like my receipt to be obvious. Otherwise I’m paying with my time whenever I don’t even know it.

gary_0
Devil's advocate: Google was awesome for over 10 years while making a huge profit with unobtrusive ads. Yes, relying on ad revenue is a strong driver of enshittification, but it's not the only factor; would Google have turned out this awful if it wasn't publicly traded, or if its corporate culture had somehow avoided becoming so Kafkaesque?
broodbucket
Is uBlock Origin not free? I can't imagine browsing the web without an adblocker, any non-invasive ads may as well not exist. The service is being subsidised by others, what cost am I paying for using DDG?
kodapoda
Wasn't there an article published recently about the ads team asking the search team to make the results less relevant to boost Google's revenue?
viraptor
Sure, but then you're fighting with the service provider. Your incentives are not aligned and the service you get may suffer. If you can't afford the alternative, go for it. But if you can, you get results which are not shaped by the behaviour of people who see the ads, which may degrade your experience.

Using ddg, you also effectively keep up ad supported businesses, since that's where you get the results from. One day you may find other engines don't want to provide the feed to ddg anymore or ddg doesn't want to serve you results with unlock.

sshine
> Is uBlock Origin not free? I can't imagine browsing the web without an adblocker

Practically, as long as you are in the minority who use blockers, others will pay for your search.

What you see with YouTube striking on people with blockers is that they have become too popular. So using a blocker you will get a degraded service in the periods where the arms race tilts in favour of the advertiser.

I object to this premise: I never agreed to watch ads in the first place. If I’m not welcome on a platform when I remove the parts I’m not interested in, I’ll pick another platform.

> what cost am I paying for using DDG?

Ads, data mining, commercialised results.

It’s not terrible. DDG is what Google was before they turned ads to 11.

contact9879
I used DuckDuckGo from 2018 until Brave Search came out. I know HN seems to be mixed on Brave Browser but their search has been great for me so far. And necroforest is right, you probably just need a more appropriate search query; "text editor" is almost universally understood as code editor nowadays.
irrational
I haven’t used Google Search in so many years that I can’t recall when I last used it. I’ve been using DuckDuckGo and it has always found what I’m looking for. Maybe I’m missing out on some results, but I have no way to know without double checking on Google, but I’ve always been satisfied with the results I’ve received and have seen no need to go looking elsewhere.
nathan_compton
I've used DDG for about 5 years and I literally haven't thought about it since I changed. Now I just ask the machine gods (GPT4) about most shit I would have googled. If I want citations I hook it up to academic search engines.
ukd1
Kagi has been worth paying for myself.
eslaught
Just FYI, the direct answer to your question (about text editors) is Typora:

https://typora.io/

[deleted]
(comment deleted)
mkl
You could try searching for what you want directly, instead of trying to modify the meaning of something else. E.g. [best writing apps] seems to work well in Google and DDG.

"Text editor" is well established as a term for plain text, like code.

Jaepa
There’s two options that comes to mind. One is to get better results by avoiding SEO.

E.g. try using “site:Reddit.com Mac text editor”

The other is to use some GPT based system. I’m not a ChatGPT booster, I do think this type of thing it does excel at. Using your query on ChatGPT 3.5 I got the following result.

Some popular Mac text editors for writing include:

1. *TextEdit*: Comes pre-installed on macOS and offers basic functionality.

2. *Sublime Text*: Known for its speed and extensive customization options.

3. *Visual Studio Code*: A free, open-source code editor that's highly extensible for writing and coding.

4. *Atom*: Another free, open-source text editor with a strong community and numerous plugins.

5. *BBEdit*: A feature-rich text editor for more advanced users.

6. *Ulysses*: A writing app with a clean, distraction-free interface and organization tools.

7. *Scrivener*: Great for long-form writing projects like novels or research papers.

8. *iA Writer*: Known for its minimalistic design and focus mode for distraction-free writing.

The best one for you depends on your specific needs, preferences, and whether you're writing code or prose.

kodapoda
I like ChatGPT summarizations but this list just confirms OP's frustration. Top 5 results are not text editors for writers (TextEdit is a basic document editor).
modeless
There's a lot of irrelevant stuff in that answer. People often dismiss ChatGPT based on the free 3.5, not realizing that the paid GPT-4 is in a different league. The difference is a lot bigger than suggested by the 0.5 version number increment. Here's a GPT-4 answer:

If you're focused on writing, then you should consider Ulysses or Scrivener. Ulysses offers a streamlined, distraction-free environment that's perfect for writers who want a no-fuss solution. Scrivener is the go-to for those engaged in long-form writing projects like novels or academic papers, thanks to its robust organizational features. If you're a Markdown fan, go for iA Writer. It's clean, offers excellent Markdown support, and is quite speedy. For coders who write, Visual Studio Code isn't just for programming; it's highly customizable and has extensions that can aid in writing prose. Choose based on your specific needs.

kodapoda
I use the free version and your example shows a vast improvement, indeed. 3.5 looks like a summary of Google results, while 4 actually gives a relevant answer. I don't have much insight into the differences between these versions, assumed that the biggest difference is "just" the training corpus.
modeless
It's also a much larger model which is slower and more expensive to run, which is why they can't offer it for free. The improvement is not always obvious at first glance but it is massive. I assume they will eventually be able to distill it into a smaller model that they can offer for free. I'm actually surprised that hasn't happened yet, especially given the fast progress in shrinking open source models.
archargelod
> The other is to use some GPT based system.

Instead of directly using chatgpt, it might be better to use AI-assisted search engines[0][1]. While their generated prompt is often misleading, most of the time the associated search result urls from them are spot-on. With You.com - use search tab, with Phind - there should be a panel to the right of prompt.

[0] - https://you.com [1] - https://phind.com - (programming-oriented results)

modeless
I haven't found these to be useful yet. GPT-4 is great at anything that it knows from its training set, but it's not so good yet at incorporating knowledge from the web.

I think the problem is that doing a good job of web search requires multiple rounds of clicking results, reading, recognizing low quality results, revising queries, etc. It's just too expensive and slow to do that with GPT-4 right now.

GPT-4 is likely capable of doing better, but it takes roughly as long as a human would take, and nobody wants to stare at a blank screen waiting for results that long, it's boring.

__d
I was a long-term DDG user, across all devices. The search quality wasn't great, but it usually found what I needed. When the results were crap, I'd append a !g to see if Google had anything better.

And the !g became increasingly useless, and DDG's primary results seemed to decline as well, and searching for stuff I knew was out there often didn't actually find stuff it should have.

So I tried Kagi, and ... it's pretty good. It still has bangs, which I like, and its primary results are good.

It's not cheap, but ... I like that it's a straightforward transaction: they don't need to be selling my queries or shoving ads in the results, they just collect my $10 every month.

So ... I recommend giving it a try. The results are good, and the feeling of an honest transaction is good too.

wendyshu
How good is Kagi for programming-related stuff?
acdha
Better than Google since you avoid the SEO spam sites which Google refuses to de-rank because they’re crammed full of ad words placements. It’s like getting 2010 Google back.
__d
This matches my feeling. As good, perhaps even better.
drcongo
I find Kagi to be better than Google ever was. I don't think I've ever even had to scroll when searching for programming stuff on Kagi, let alone click through to a second page. There's a couple of things I've found where it could be better, searching for kitchen appliances like I have been this morning seems to return a fair number of low quality sites, though this could massively vary regionally.
__d
I'm a programmer. I mostly look for C++ and Python stuff, with a smattering of other things. I find Kagi to be better than both DDG and Google today, and perhaps close to as good as Google was at its best.

It's hard to tell: it's very subjective, and I'm not sure how accurate my recollection of Google's past performance is. The world has also changed: there's a lot more SEO-spam sites out there, so the job of a search engine is much harder.

They have a free trial (300 queries? 500? something). I did that first. It was a little quick to finish -- I wasn't quite ready to commit when it ran out. But I bit the bullet (it's monthly, so I was out $10 at worse) and ended up staying.

coreyp_1
Honestly, I like the Bing search engine. They at least give me points in exchange for tracking me, and I cash those in for Amazon credit.

I would love to have a search engine, though, that would actually include all the terms that I type in, exactly as I typed it. It's such a simple concept, I can't believe that it's not an option!

kodapoda
3rd result in Kagi is a link to "The best Mac apps for writers and authors | AppleInsider" that lists OmniOutliner, Drafts 5, Ulysses, etc.
beej71
What sold me on Kagi was when I was trying to find the age of a small lava flow in central Oregon. Google was completely useless. Kagi got it to me on hit #3.

Having a search engine driven by being the best search engine versus by maximizing ad revenue is great, IMHO.

kodapoda
Makes me happy to see that Kagi is so popular in the HN bubble. Changing people's mindset regarding the idea of having to pay for quality search is such a fundamental obstacle, wish them luck!
explaininjs
I’m a fan of Bing.

But your issue is in your search term. Nobody but programmers would ever call a thing a “text editor”. And “for writing” changes nothing: I use VSCode “for writing” code. With “macos writing app” the results are far superior.

(source: I used to make “a text editor” for a living and I can tell you that 0% of the population understands what that means, “It’s like microsoft word, except instead of writing text documents you write the code to create computer programs” gets you pretty far tho)

jsnell
You might consider the possibility that your query was just not very good, and you should have put some effort into fixing it.

Why are you searching specifically for "mac text editors for writing"? Why not for example "mac apps for writing" or "mac word processors for writing"?

Likewise, what are you writing if not code? Literature? Academic papers? A screenplay? Notes to yourself? Even another human can't guess this correctly, let alone the search engine. Only you know it. Put that detail into the query!

Also, I don't know that you should ever search for the "best" anything. That word alone is pretty much guaranteed to get you just SEO listicles or marketing pages.