In case you don't know, LN is available now in Bitcoin network (not testnet), but only very few services such as TorGuard which use LN since LN isn't production ready. LN fees is extremely low, but the only problem is transaction fees when opening LN channel.
But i'm sure LN adoption is extremely slow just like SegWit and there aren't any newbie/user-friendly LN wallet
SegWit also can reduce the problem, but SegWit adoption is very slow even though people know SegWit have lower weight and tx size which means they can pay lower fees and help reduce mempool/pending transaction.
More info :
http://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-fees-mainnet-lightning-network/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7npeh6/lightning_network_megathread/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7p9b1t/day_8_i_will_post_this_guide_regularly_until/
Are you replying to me?
I am very well aware of those brave individuals (not my words, saw it on LN mailing list form a person named ZmnSCPxj) who use it on the main net.
But even on GitHub README page you can see a clear warning that states that it is not ready and as I said, I got a segmentation fault myself few days ago.
So it is not ready for sure, but if you want to use it for most basic stuff and do only exactly what someone already did in exact steps, you will still have a chance of things not working out and funds being lost. I am saying this from the personal experience.
The current problem of Bitcoin is scaling. Too many transactions means too much time for each one to be processed, which also means higher fees because these transactions are competing with each other to be processed as fast as possible.
Two solutions were suggested: SegWit and LN. SegWit has been implemented in the protocol, but its adoption is still slow. LN is under development and we don't know when it will be fully implemented in Core. Both of these solutions seem to change the structure of the Bitcoin protocol: SegWit is a different way of coding transactions, LN is a side-chain.
Bitcoin Cash seems (but this is where I would love to get some more info) to have solved the scaling problem by keeping the protocol intact and increasing the block size. Bigger blocks means more transactions that can be stored in a block.
Has Bitcoin Cash found the solution to the problem in a simpler way than what Bitcoin is trying to achieve? (No flame intent, but just an honest discussion)
It would be hard to say that they found it, since this was a plan all along, this is not some issue that wasn't expected. It was planned by Satoshi and suggested that this type of hard fork is made. It is a simpler solution, but Segwit and LN allow something else as well as solve this, so it was decided to be implemented instead. My only worry is that we will not have Core fully support Segwit for 4 more months at least.