My opinion? He is right!
The current situation of the bitcoin clients and their interface is that they sucks. The standard client is not easy for a newbie to use. It's interface sucks, it automatically create a wallet no-one-know-where (yeah in appdata bitcoin but you need to search for this info!), it automatically download the whole chain even if a newbie don't even know what it is and don't need it since he will only run the client for 5minutes, do a transaction and close it.
Multibit? It's much better but why it cannot open normal wallets? I have no idea...
Topic: My first experience with bitcoin was NOT positive :( - page 4. (Read 6537 times)
It's not like this is a new concern.
The correct solution is to point people to an SPV implementation like MultiBit (note: NOT a hosted wallet). It's not being done by the official bitcoin.org site yet because there are still some issues with MultiBit that are fairly important and need to be addressed. Once that's done we can think about changing the default recommendation (which will be a fairly long and tiring debate).
If you care about this, go ahead and write patches for bitcoinj, as that's where most of the problems lie.
The correct solution is to point people to an SPV implementation like MultiBit (note: NOT a hosted wallet). It's not being done by the official bitcoin.org site yet because there are still some issues with MultiBit that are fairly important and need to be addressed. Once that's done we can think about changing the default recommendation (which will be a fairly long and tiring debate).
If you care about this, go ahead and write patches for bitcoinj, as that's where most of the problems lie.
Blockchain.info's my wallet is much safer, with 2 factor auth. The only way someone can steal your coin, is if while you are logged into blockchain.info, your computer gets taken over by someone else. Otherwise, there's no way you can lose your coins. (well I guess the only other way is the owner himself has gone rogue, unlikely.)
It's not like this is a new concern.
The correct solution is to point people to an SPV implementation like MultiBit (note: NOT a hosted wallet). It's not being done by the official bitcoin.org site yet because there are still some issues with MultiBit that are fairly important and need to be addressed. Once that's done we can think about changing the default recommendation (which will be a fairly long and tiring debate).
If you care about this, go ahead and write patches for bitcoinj, as that's where most of the problems lie.
The correct solution is to point people to an SPV implementation like MultiBit (note: NOT a hosted wallet). It's not being done by the official bitcoin.org site yet because there are still some issues with MultiBit that are fairly important and need to be addressed. Once that's done we can think about changing the default recommendation (which will be a fairly long and tiring debate).
If you care about this, go ahead and write patches for bitcoinj, as that's where most of the problems lie.
I don't think it's so much a concern about there being a lack of alternative wallets, but rather the wide dispersion and sometimes conflicting information out there. The reddit post in OP was the story of someone who wanted to try BTC and obviously knew SOMETHING about bitcoins, but had never come across anything warning against using the official client until it was to late. I always thought weusecoins.org was a really good site, but it still promotes the official client first.
It's not like this is a new concern.
The correct solution is to point people to an SPV implementation like MultiBit (note: NOT a hosted wallet). It's not being done by the official bitcoin.org site yet because there are still some issues with MultiBit that are fairly important and need to be addressed. Once that's done we can think about changing the default recommendation (which will be a fairly long and tiring debate).
If you care about this, go ahead and write patches for bitcoinj, as that's where most of the problems lie.
The correct solution is to point people to an SPV implementation like MultiBit (note: NOT a hosted wallet). It's not being done by the official bitcoin.org site yet because there are still some issues with MultiBit that are fairly important and need to be addressed. Once that's done we can think about changing the default recommendation (which will be a fairly long and tiring debate).
If you care about this, go ahead and write patches for bitcoinj, as that's where most of the problems lie.
In 2024 probably the dollar will be collapsed and 4 or 5 countries in Europe will have their citizens funds seized. I think it will still be worth to wait two or three days for the blockchain to download. And that will be the situation only if the network communications don't improve and the blockchain isn't pruned.
This kind of complains are just trolling compared to the benefits that Bitcoin offers.
This kind of complains are just trolling compared to the benefits that Bitcoin offers.
Meanwhile, in the real world we have a real issue that is causing real people to turn off from Bitcoin before even trying. I'm not sure why you think your on-high opinion is so important, but it is also irrelevant to this thread.
To bad there isn't some sort of, I don't know, foundation or something, that could help address these issues
The bitcoin.org site should have a list of hosted wallets, not just clients. Non-tech savvy newbies should be pointed in the direction of hosted wallets.
I just created this thread 2 days ago.
I promote My Wallet myself, but bitcoin.org should probably be more careful.
The problem he had waiting for sync will only get worse as time goes by as well. Imagine him downloading in 2024.
In 2024 probably the dollar will be collapsed and 4 or 5 countries in Europe will have their citizens funds seized. I think it will still be worth to wait two or three days for the blockchain to download. And that will be the situation only if the network communications don't improve and the blockchain isn't pruned.
This kind of complains are just trolling compared to the benefits that Bitcoin offers.
The bitcoin.org site should have a list of hosted wallets, not just clients. Non-tech savvy newbies should be pointed in the direction of hosted wallets.
The problem he had waiting for sync will only get worse as time goes by as well. Imagine him downloading in 2024.
His concern is legit. Bitcoin info is so spread out and confusing.
His concern is legit. Bitcoin info is so spread out and confusing.
The answer is FU.CK YOU. Everybody is able to wait one or two days downloading the last brand new videogame in their bittorrent client, or the last blockbuster movie but is too lazy to wait a day for the blockchain to download.
Only a day downloading and a new economy will be available for the user. And they still complain.
Only a day downloading and a new economy will be available for the user. And they still complain.
This is post from reddit http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/148abf/my_first_experience_with_bitcoin_was_not_positive/
I'm bringing this here to emphasize how big problems new users are having with default client.
I'm bringing this here to emphasize how big problems new users are having with default client.
Quote
After seeing an interesting comment on /r/funny in which bitcoin currency is used to make tips across reddit I started to investigate and learn about the Bitcoin. I had heard about it before but I didn't know how it worked or what I had to do in order to use it.
A dozen Bitcoin Wiki entries later I download bitcoin-qt and create my first wallet. The system seemed very easy and straightforward and I had already started to apply for "free starter bitcoins" when I met "synchronization".
Now synchronization is not necessarily a deal breaker but it was annoying as hell. I'm using an old computer and it seemed as if it would take at least a day if not more to complete the whole process... and during that time my computer was getting slow as hell.
Now I'm quite a tech savy person and I know why in this P2P based system this is important, but for anyone else this would be unacceptable. Imagine elder people or not so tech savy persons trying out the system for the first time and noticing that they can't use it without occupying 2+ GiB of their HardDrive and having to wait a lot.
I did not complete the sync and tried to use the multibit instead. But since I had already applied to the Free starter bitcoins on some websites I wanted to keep my old wallet. I try to look for an import/export button but it seems that Bitcoin-qt doesn't support exportation and I needed to use a third party application called pywallet (command line!) to export my wallet and convert it into another plaintext format since the format used by bitcoin-qt was not supported by multibit.
And one would assume that the first thing you do when creating such a currency is to define a standard for the wallet and the applications. Again, I know how to use the command line but anyone who doesn't and who just wants to try out the system for the first time would be inmediately turned off by this limitation.
These are all issues that need to be fixed and addressed. Also, at the current situation it is much more comfortable and easier to set up an e-wallet than using standalone software on my computer. And if you ask me, it beats the purpose of creating a decentralized currency when in the end the most popular e-wallet services are going to hold most bitcoins and suppose a great security risk.
So I ask you: do you know any solutions to the above mentioned problems? Is there any way to reduce the impact by those hindrances?
A dozen Bitcoin Wiki entries later I download bitcoin-qt and create my first wallet. The system seemed very easy and straightforward and I had already started to apply for "free starter bitcoins" when I met "synchronization".
Now synchronization is not necessarily a deal breaker but it was annoying as hell. I'm using an old computer and it seemed as if it would take at least a day if not more to complete the whole process... and during that time my computer was getting slow as hell.
Now I'm quite a tech savy person and I know why in this P2P based system this is important, but for anyone else this would be unacceptable. Imagine elder people or not so tech savy persons trying out the system for the first time and noticing that they can't use it without occupying 2+ GiB of their HardDrive and having to wait a lot.
I did not complete the sync and tried to use the multibit instead. But since I had already applied to the Free starter bitcoins on some websites I wanted to keep my old wallet. I try to look for an import/export button but it seems that Bitcoin-qt doesn't support exportation and I needed to use a third party application called pywallet (command line!) to export my wallet and convert it into another plaintext format since the format used by bitcoin-qt was not supported by multibit.
And one would assume that the first thing you do when creating such a currency is to define a standard for the wallet and the applications. Again, I know how to use the command line but anyone who doesn't and who just wants to try out the system for the first time would be inmediately turned off by this limitation.
These are all issues that need to be fixed and addressed. Also, at the current situation it is much more comfortable and easier to set up an e-wallet than using standalone software on my computer. And if you ask me, it beats the purpose of creating a decentralized currency when in the end the most popular e-wallet services are going to hold most bitcoins and suppose a great security risk.
So I ask you: do you know any solutions to the above mentioned problems? Is there any way to reduce the impact by those hindrances?
Jump to: