There is actually quite a few people who have checked Classic and UL. XT seems to be dead.

Whether indicates that people are actually running the software, or simply supports the notions behind it, is the question.



I've postponed the actual analysis, but as soon as I have some numbers, I'll make sure to post it in this thread.


Yes, I was expecting a bit more response. Hopefully, this little bump will provide a few new answers.

I would like to post it in a week or so, when my analysis is done

However, at the moment, there is too few respondents too make it useful for me or interesting for you.

Well, I actually thought they were "competing" software, for the miners to choose between, until Lauda enlightened me that XT is already dead and Classic is dying. And he don't seems to optimistic about BU.

Basically, they differ on the question of blocksize.
Core wants to keep at 1MB
Classic wants to increase it to 2MB
XT (used to) want to increase gradually, starting with 2MB, then 4MB, 8MB and then 16MB.
BU sets no limit, and leaves it up to miners to set the limit.

Or at least, thats how I've understood it. Please correct me if I'm wrong anyone.


And yes it helps! Thank you!  

No, I was actually not aware that Classic were dying, and that XT was already dead.. Surprised by that.. As a non-user BU seems to take some very radical steps compared to classic and xt.


Not to start a blocksize debate here, but I got the impression that the general view amongst users was that Core devs was too conservative.

First of all, sorry for spamming the forum, hope you don't get too much of this.


I'm doing a paper on the incentives and reasons why users use Bitcoins. It's 7 multiple choice questions, takes a minute to complete: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1QUxwovU7dT5WMk_Gxy_tNG3dYdldOVS3KHVlBg3IgZ8/viewform


Would really appreciate if you have the time for it and thank you in advance!


The final report is in English. Be happy to post it or the results of the poll if requested.