A question on my mind over the past couple of months, and brought into focus recently by the need of peercoin.net to inform and direct visitors, is the relationship between Sunny’s Peercoin client and the Peerunity client
It is easy for us who are members of this Forum to understand the difference between these two clients, and choose between them. But I do not think it is reasonable to expect such a choice from people who are not regular followers. Members of the public simply want one client to download
My view, therefore, is that we should only offer one client
I was wondering whether we could reach consensus on two points:
i) Which client is preferable
and/or
ii) Whether only one should be offered?
For myself, it seems to me that Sunny’s client is the one that drives the deeper underlying development, but that these improvements spill over onto the Peerunity client, which can add further facilities, such as coin control. For the past month, I have been using the Peerunity client
I don’t think that we should decide on one client, btc offers way more clients which also shows the decentralization of the coin.
I think there should be a short introduction to each wallet and users choose the simple one (S.K.) or the more advanced (with Coin Control etc.).
Thats how the btc website shows them: https://bitcoin.org/en/choose-your-wallet they have an introduction if you point your mose at them.
I agree with hZti that having multiple wallets is a good thing. I think that any confusion can be solved by simply having a little “recommended” text beside the Peerunity download link. Peerunity gives a much better impression of the coin and the average user should be directed towards it.
[quote=“hZti, post:2, topic:2663”]I don’t think that we should decide on one client, btc offers way more clients which also shows the decentralization of the coin.
I think there should be a short introduction to each wallet and users choose the simple one (S.K.) or the more advanced (with Coin Control etc.).
Thats how the btc website shows them: https://bitcoin.org/en/choose-your-wallet they have an introduction if you point your mose at them.[/quote]
I want to raise this topic again, as it affects the development of the peercoin.net website
I don’t agree with the above comparison to the BTC wallet page, since BTC is offering different wallets for different environments: mobile, desktop, web. This is perfectly sound
In contrast, the equivalent page on peercoin.net (in development) will list two wallets for the same purpose - both desktop - Peercoin-QT and Peerunity. Peerunity is virtually the same as Peercoin-QT, but with better branding and extra optional features. As I see it, unless Peercoin-QT does something that Peerunity does not, what is the point?
I do not think offering both clients is resolved by recommending Peerunity, since we are (by implication) persuading people not to use Peercoin-QT which, having offered it to them, is incongruous
The benefit for the website of going with Peerunity is that, if we have one client, then we need only one page to introduce and explain it
I have seen people say in the past that they would only ever use a Peercoin client developed by Sunny King. While the average user probably wouldn’t have such strong convictions, they might find it a bit strange that the official website doesn’t have downloads for the official client. It would definitely make things easier, but unless Sunny decides to forget about Peercoin-QT and make Peerunity the official client, I don’t think we can only offer Peerunity.