Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Google translate, maps and search has no competitors that even come close in terms of quality.

This is patently false, and probably a reflection of the Google bubble you live in.

DeepL is pretty objectively superior to Google, as evaluated by journalists who natively speak the languages it translates in the articles linked on their website. You can find plenty of in depth reviews online, and every one I've read has admitted that it's at absolute worst as bad as Google Translate. Edit: https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/29/deepl-schools-other-online...

Maps is a different story, but there are certainly better options for certain specific needs. I'd like to see the noise-pollution based routing service on HN's frontpage yesterday remade with Google Maps.

Search is somewhat subjective, but I haven't used Google Search in several years and I don't consider an engine that requires me to scroll past page after page of ads — including what amount to ads for services like Google's inferior flight service, that won't necessarily be easily removed by an "out of the box" ad blocker — high quality.

And those are the services you picked. The article has a great little analysis of Google Flights and why "It did not crack the top 10 of Frommer’s 2020 ranking of airfare search engines, for instance" and why the FTC's leaked documents called it out for providing less options. (Spoiler: Up to 80% more expensive flights, when it found flights at all).



Google's flight service is not a booking service. It's flight search. It just redirects you to the airline in question.

Personally I love it. It's so much faster than all the competitors. Further it not covered in ads. I just went to SkyScanner and there's an ad for fried chicken. Seriously WTF!


Edited to remove “booking”. But as "“a partnership with Google is required” to appear in Google Flights", (and it hides the best flights, likely because of lack of such a “partnership”), I would consider the entire service an infomercial-like advertisement.


Google Flights' list of booking options is much more reliable and trustworthy than the sketchy OTAs that offer slightly discounted flights and then conveniently disappear with your money if you ever need customer support, or worse, levy bullshit fees to do things that would otherwise be free if you booked through official channels.

If you want to screw yourself over for $20 savings, use another flight search engine. I'm quite happy with Google Flights myself and don't need it ruined.


It provides a better search than, say, united's search. Especially if you are looking for partner-flights or more interesting layover-cities. But it also doesn't include southwest flights (most aggregators don't) which often have the best price for my home airport on short-hauls.


I've found plenty of situations where OSM has better data than Google Maps.


Absolutely, eg. the woods near my house have trails mapped out in OSM that don't exist on Google Maps.


I also find Google's colour scheme rather obnoxious when I want to use the map to actually orient myself (instead of it being merely a convenient geographical background for displaying POIs and route planning) – forests aren't displayed at all once you start zooming in and the distinction between built-up areas and open space (which isn't great to start with) gets more and more indistinct as well.


Anyone remember the 90s-era Windows rants about how it was simply objectively better at <x>, as demonstrated by a lack of competition?

Good times.


It had competition from Apple and IBM. But look Windows domination was ended by Android and Apple IOS. Same happen with Explorer which was killed by ooensource products like Firefox and later Chrome


The death of IE was helped greatly by antitrust action by the EU.

If you think MSFT wouldn’t have snuffed out Firefox and Chrome the moment they got a chance you’re greatly mistaken.


How would they have ‘snuffed out’ chrome?

Chrome performed better than any other browser at the time it came out, and was advertised in the most prominent place in the world.

How would MS have stopped it?


To be fair, DeepL doesn't support all the languages Google supports.


True (edit: and not my downvote), and Google Translate doesn't support all the languages Microsoft Translate supports: https://hackertimes.com/item?id=23977310. But my point was that not only is “Google translate … has no competitors that even come close in terms of quality” absolutely false, but that Google Translate is not even way too close to as good as its competitors, and DeepL is a service that I can personally vouch for, and there's even broad consensus that it's at worst as bad as GT.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: