Thank you for explanations.
i'm curious if there is any data to support this, i thought it plateaued a while ago.
Sure there is, and if you look you will see I posted Bech32 statistics link in first post.
Yes it is weird his Casa wallet is still on the list
Thank you for noticing that Breadwallet now supports bech32.
I corrected and removed it from the list.
I will advice you to also list the wallets that are supoorting native segwit addresses to be included, because the wallet people will be looking for are the ones that support native segwit, and going through your topic can make them easily identify wallets that support native segwit.
I was thinking of making that list, but maybe later.
For now you will know wallet is supporting Bech32 if it's not on this list
Are all the problems technical (lazy exchanges and wallets,) or did Bech32 addresses have some problems as there was no specific standard for signing the message.
Also, not updating does not mean that they are lazy, but they may not want that, as many of these platforms promote altcoins, and therefore it is in their interest to keep fees slightly high so that there is a logical reason for using altcoins.
If Bech32 addresses have some problems, then Legacy and Segwit addresses also have their own problems and excuses like altcoins is not good enough, but sure, some services just don't want to support Bech32 for various reasons and to me it looks a bit lazy
This is explanation Chipmixer gave to me:
We are not supporting Bech32.
We are aware of advantages it gives but we support customers that use old wallets.
Deposit address is legacy address. Chip address is legacy address.
You can send Bech32 -> legacy, receive chips and sweep them to Bech32 address.