I've said this for a long time, but I think the biggest thing holding back DDG from truly widespread adoption is the name and branding.
No one is ever going to 'dukgo' someone. Searching is a verb, the naming conventions used with DDG in its current form just don't fly. I'd love to talk shop with Gabriel about the identity decisions, and whether he is open to pivoting the brand identity now that the service is getting more well known..
I agree. Google became a verb because the search engine was successful, not the other way around. Furthermore:
- Microsoft spent pots of cash trying to verbify their search engine with their "bing and decide" commercials. As far as I know, this hasn't worked for them.
- IIRC Google themselves tend to use the form "do a Google search" - or they risk losing their trademark.
- Duck Duck Go is a catchy name - three punchy syllables. (I've recently become a fan of The Name Inspector's blog).
- And people should definitely stop using "pivot" when they just mean "change". Or "disruptive" when they mean "new". It's the startup equivalent of the crystal healers who use words like "quantum" to sound more intelligent.
No, but it helps. My grandma says "I'll Google it". In the case of Altavista (yep she already had internet back then), she'd say "I'll try to use the site you bookmarked for me". Reason #1 for her familiarity with Google is the ease-of-use: an obvious box for typing shit, one obvious list for clicking shit, combined into one website for finding shit. But the apparent naturalness of Google as a verb—even in Dutch—makes old (and less old) folks feel like they are with the times. A verbalizable name helps because verbs tend to integrate into everyday talk more easily, whereas nouns always have a sense of otherness attached to them. With a service like search that is so central to the web-experience, you don't want that otherness, but perhaps when you are competing with Google Search it is best to have that sort of distance.
DuckDuckGo is a good enough name. Penetrating market share is incredibly difficult in the search market. Microsoft is spending billions of dollars each year marketing Bing to the masses and it still only has about 14% market share. It takes time, technology, and money to break the mindshare of users away from Google Search. DuckDuckGo has the name, they just need the time, technology, and money to market to the mainstream.
He should just rename it "Go"...it's both shorter than Google, works great as a verb "I'm going to Go to xyz site" meaning searching on the Go search engine is akin to a behavior many people already have -- searching for sites instead of typing their url.
Plus it helpfully further confuses the word "Go", it's a programming language, a regular old verb, and a search engine!
"""To be fair, it came as an asset in an unrelated acquisition (On2). But it just sat their (pointing to this Duck Corporation history page) for a long time.
I first inquired about it on 11/4/09. After several attempts, I got back a response "from management" on 3/25/10 that they didn't want to sell it. Understandable.
Now http://www.on2.com/ points to a Google explanation page about the On2 acquisition, yet http://duck.com/ points directly to Google search."""
Agreed. He has a short URL but I'll be darned if I can remember it. Something like ddggg?
Edit: Right, ddg.gg. I guess I had it. But don't tell me it's memorable (I only recalled increasing character repetition). How do others remember it? "Duck Duck G-G-Go"? He definitely needs a short, pronounceable name.
What's with the name?
It is derived from Duck Duck Goose, but it's not a metaphor—really. If you're wondering how you would turn that into a verb...Duck it!
No one is ever going to 'dukgo' someone. Searching is a verb, the naming conventions used with DDG in its current form just don't fly. I'd love to talk shop with Gabriel about the identity decisions, and whether he is open to pivoting the brand identity now that the service is getting more well known..