Sometimes when I use exact matches like "keyword1" "keyword2" I see results that contain some of the matches but not others. Is there a search engine that only shows results with all the exact matches exactly as they are written?

  • Vlyn@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m just facepalming at all the people who are saying it works with quotation marks and minus signs. Bollocks works.

    Go to Google right now and search exactly for: “SearX222” with the quotation marks. You won’t get any result. Even though SearX and SearX2 find a lot of them.

    Sometimes Google offers to search for a similar term (thinking you made a typo), but if you wrap that term in quotation marks then that’s what you get.

    There are more tricks to it, but I’m facepalming at your reply.

    • Hyggyldy@sffa.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s honestly pretty inconsistent. I’ve definitely had it completely disregard my quotes without giving me a choice.

        • WhoRoger@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I don’t write down every query I use. I remember last week or so I was looking for some obscure director whose both first and last name were shared with popular celebrities. Search engines needed a lot of fucking convincing to get what I needed.

          It gets worse if you’re trying to find an exact quote, or a combination of very common words that you know exist in a particular formation. Yea, good luck.

          It may work when it’s really simple and when you are looking for something that would end up in top 10 results anyway. Otherwise it gets aggravating.

          • null@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’ve never had that happen when I put a term in quotations. Always works exactly as intended for me.

            I think you’re mistaken.

            • linearchaos@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Nah, they’re not mistaken, Google has a bunch of long running experiments, in some of them verbatim only works if you check a box and others verbatim is broken all together.

              The verbatim searching is either crippled or outright broken for a decent percentage of users and has been for a while now.

            • WhoRoger@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              This is why I hesitated to reply to you in the first place. Sure, everywhere on the internet people complain how this shit doesn’t work reliably, but it works for you so everyone must be just having nightmares and mistaking them for real life.

              You never has a problem? Great for you. It still works like ass, and your and others’ “works for me” is of no help to people who are asking for a solution.

              • null@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Everywhere on the internet people are complaining that search terms in quotes on Google don’t work?

                Sure bud.

                Look how defensive you’re getting when shown evidence that it works fine and being asked for a single example to the contrary.

    • Crazypartypony@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That wasn’t the problem, though. If you have multiple it can take some and not others, and also it’s inconsistent as another commenter mentioned.