Biased, intentionally crafted comparison table by coinprism devs to represent their developments in the best possible way whilst throwing the others under the bus. They have been message about incorrect information but refused to update it.
the following entries for example
Send to multisig address, Native Android Wallet, Other platforms , Open source, Support for unconfirmed transactions , Asset icon , Associate contract with asset, Proof of authenticity , Send assets to multiple recipients.
are ALL marked as an X in the counterparty table column (ie they claim counterparty does not support any of those features) when in fact the platform supports
every one of those.
only coinprism open source? seriously?.. That's just negligent. They have purposefully left of a bunch of argument points that would paint coinprism in a less positive light an
e.g open assets doesn't support true spv, requires use of either a centralized asset tracking server or running your own server, does not allow locking of assets (their genius solution is to delete the private key
), not compatible with vanilla bitcoin addresses, stores certain data in centralized manner, (they try and somehow push this as a benefit
) DOES NOT HAVE DECENTRALIZED EXCHANGE FUNCTIONALITY, unwieldy tracking of complex colors, opens gates for asset tracking gateways to monetize transactions - their business model (and likely some reasons nasdaq chose it )
Counterparty has at least:
* the same functionality as colored coins (it costs 0 XCP to create an asset, only bitcoin is required)
*
decentralized asset trading with automatic order matching <-- this is the reason we're here...
* assets that can pay distributions (dividends)
* assets can be customized (divisibility, callback, locked or issueable, total amount, description)
* peer-to-peer betting
* broadcasts
* contracts for difference
* smart contracts
