What Bitcoin client are you going to be using?

[drawingthesun]

I'm a little confused about what is going on with Bitcoin, so I wanted to get an idea if any of these other clients have a decent following.

Here are the links to the various projects.

Bitcoin Core
https://bitcoin.org/en/

Bitcoin XT
https://bitcoinxt.software/

Bitcoin Classic
https://bitcoinclassic.com/

Bitcoin Unlimited
http://www.bitcoinunlimited.info/

-dts-

[Amph]

can they simply fork bitcoin core with the 2mb change and call it bitcoin core? do we really need a fancy name change, and treat it as a simply upgrade of core...

i'm with core, but i would like to get rid of the limit, gradually maybe...

[smith coins]

I'm a little confused about what is going on with Bitcoin, so I wanted to get an idea if any of these other clients have a decent following.

Here are the links to the various projects.

Bitcoin Core
https://bitcoin.org/en/

Bitcoin XT
https://bitcoinxt.software/

Bitcoin Classic
https://bitcoinclassic.com/

Bitcoin Unlimited
http://www.bitcoinunlimited.info/

-dts-

I am not using any of them but if i would use i would go with Bitcoin Core

[xdrpx]

I'm currently using the Bitcoin core. I really am very confused about the blocksize debate and what would be the most preferable blocksize. Thus I'll stick to core. Apart from that, if Bitcoin Core really does increase the blocksize I would like to know how would full nodes be affected by this, cause I run a full node at present.

[randy8777]

can they simply fork bitcoin core with the 2mb change and call it bitcoin core? do we really need a fancy name change, and treat it as a simply upgrade of core...

i'm with core, but i would like to get rid of the limit, gradually maybe...

i am also using bitcoin core and will continue doing so, but as you say, there need to be something done with the blocksize issue as all these xt, classic and unlimited versions are just the beginning of a whole new flood of alternatives. what's next, bitcoin final? bitcoin real? bitcoin hd?

[drawingthesun]

can they simply fork bitcoin core with the 2mb change and call it bitcoin core? do we really need a fancy name change, and treat it as a simply upgrade of core...

i'm with core, but i would like to get rid of the limit, gradually maybe...

i am also using bitcoin core and will continue doing so, but as you say, there need to be something done with the blocksize issue as all these xt, classic and unlimited versions are just the beginning of a whole new flood of alternatives. what's next, bitcoin final? bitcoin real? bitcoin hd?

Yeah I agree that all of these clients with different rules and such is a bad idea.

I can't imagine a lot of new money coming into Bitcoin with all of this confusion.

I think that Unlimited has a small following, I can't see many mentions of it on the reddit.

I think Gavin Anderson was behind XT but now he supports Classic.

So I'm guessing that makes the two main clients Core and Classic.

Can anyone really explain it simply what the main differences between these two are?

I heard that both plan to put in 2mb max size blocks, so what's with the divide?

[Amph]

can they simply fork bitcoin core with the 2mb change and call it bitcoin core? do we really need a fancy name change, and treat it as a simply upgrade of core...

i'm with core, but i would like to get rid of the limit, gradually maybe...

i am also using bitcoin core and will continue doing so, but as you say, there need to be something done with the blocksize issue as all these xt, classic and unlimited versions are just the beginning of a whole new flood of alternatives. what's next, bitcoin final? bitcoin real? bitcoin hd?

Yeah I agree that all of these clients with different rules and such is a bad idea.

I can't imagine a lot of new money coming into Bitcoin with all of this confusion.

I think that Unlimited has a small following, I can't see many mentions of it on the reddit.

I think Gavin Anderson was behind XT but now he supports Classic.

So I'm guessing that makes the two main clients Core and Classic.

Can anyone really explain it simply what the main differences between these two are?

I heard that both plan to put in 2mb max size blocks, so what's with the divide?

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/unlimited-classic-and-bitpay-core-bitcoin-s-new-kids-on-the-blockchain-1452705977

more akin to unlimited version but without the unlmited thing, if they were the same as forking core but with a different name, pretty much from QT to core, then one can go ahead and be pro it

but i still prefer if they keep the name core, it appear to be more neutral than the other

[LFC_Bitcoin]

can they simply fork bitcoin core with the 2mb change and call it bitcoin core? do we really need a fancy name change, and treat it as a simply upgrade of core...

i'm with core, but i would like to get rid of the limit, gradually maybe...

This is exactly where I'm at. SegWit appeals to me though with a concrete increase in block size when required.

[maokoto]

I do not use anyone of those in the list. I use microwallet HD, which works fine for me, makes automatic backups and has enough security for what I need (although many will disagree). I suppose many others use it as well.

[unamis76]

I'm also a bit confused and just now starting to know a bit better all of these clients. Voted Classic on the pool because it is the one that looks to be more balanced towards a block size increase as of now, but I've had Core and XT nodes and use both regularly.

Let's see how this plays out, I just hope changes get merged into Core eventually.

[Peter R]

Personally, I will run Unlimited, because it is the easiest client to track consensus with.  Thanks to the user-adjustable block size limits, it also gives me the most freedom to signal my block size limit preferences to the network.

The great thing is that all of the implementations can be made to work cooperatively with each other (Classic and Unlimited are already compatible with each other), thereby decentralizing development.  I suspect Core will capitulate and switch to 2 MB before they lose their node share.

[Carlton Banks]

Personally, I will run Unlimited, because it is the easiest client to track consensus with.  Thanks to the user-adjustable block size limits, it also gives me the most freedom to signal my block size limit preferences to the network.

Great plan Peter, when will you implement the pass-Go-collect-$200 button? 

[zeaderza]

For me the best is bitcoin core.
I use bitcoin core because is original client made by Satoshi Nakamoto ( the master)
If Satoshi Nakamoto will create another software,I will trust him and I will use the new bitcoin client.

[orpington]

These new implementations are part of a plot to dilute, weaken and ultimately destroy bitcoin and are brought to you by TPTB.

Core is the only bitcoin and the only choice.

[DeathAngel]

Core.

Mr Hearn & Gavin can go blow each other.

[throwaway]

Anything but Core.

Greg and Luke can go blow each other.

[BeetcoinScummer]

Whatever the bald-headed Coinbase motherfucker is not using.

[eternalgloom]

I'm sticking with core for the time being, I have no reason to switch to anything else.
Hoping the current issues with the block size are resolved soon though.

[Jeremycoin]

I will use Core as the first and the last, would think to changing to the other client.

[Outlander]

I still stick with core. All of the clients are for the same goals increasing the blocksize with different steps. But I have to say the core teams are too conservative with the necessary updates been implemented to correspond with the expanding network transaction volume.