←back to thread

270 points lkellar | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.204s | source
Show context
Etheryte ◴[] No.41873306[source]
This is a solid idea, but I wish they addressed the elephant in the room — image search is by far the weakest part of Kagi. For a considerable portion of queries, a large part of the results isn't relevant. If you use filters, they're often ignored or don't apply correctly. Many images are tangentially related at best. The list goes on. I've been paying for Kagi for a long while, yet I've seen nearly no improvements on this front. Image search is one part of their product where I often go to Google or other options because what Kagi does there just doesn't cut it.
replies(5): >>41873394 #>>41873578 #>>41873589 #>>41873830 #>>41873847 #
1. dmonitor ◴[] No.41873847[source]
Image search is the one area in Kagi that I've seen the most improvement over the past year. When I first subscribed, I'd often switch to Google to find what I was looking for. Nowadays it works exactly as I intend.