Is there a site showing all the different Bitcoin implemenations?

[colinistheman]

I want lots of interesting graphs and charts.

[danielW]

Lots of interesting graphs and charts.

NodeCounter.com

How come bitcoin.org, bitcointalk, bitcoincore.org, r/bitcoin is censored from the site?

[achow101]

Lots of interesting graphs and charts.

NodeCounter.com

How come bitcoin.org, bitcointalk, bitcoincore.org, r/bitcoin is censored from the site?

Because they are for Bitcoin Core which they obviously are against (it was previously XTNodes.com, so you know who they are biased towards). Just like how Bitcoin Core isn't even linked or mentioned there at all excepted for their counts.

This clearly does not show all of the different node implementations. It misses the other full node implementations that are listed here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1330770.0

[achow101]

How come bitcoin.org, bitcointalk, bitcoincore.org, r/bitcoin is censored from the site?

Probably because all those sites you listed censor all talk of /r/btc and Bitcoin Classic, Bitcoin Unlimited, and XT.

bitcoin.org and bitcoincore.org don't censor anything, those are informational websites, not discussion websites like reddit and this forum.

And if they are so against censorship, then why are they censoring Bitcoin Core from that website?

[achow101]

And if they are so against censorship, then why are they censoring Bitcoin Core from that website?

Two things:

NodeCounter.com does show Core now.

Well it does now after I have pointed out your hipocrisy 

Bitcoin.org does not provide links or downloads to any of the new implementations. Bitcoin.org also banned Coinbase.com for saying they were going to use Bitcoin Classic.

Coinbase has been reinstated on the website for quite some time.

Bitcoin.org doesn't provide links to those wallets, probably because of their hard forking stuff which goes against their hard fork policy: https://bitcoin.org/en/posts/hard-fork-policy. And before you argue that it is not a contentious hard fork, if it wasn't so contentious, then why all the debate?

Since it is pretty clear that you are the administrator of that site or have direct communication with the administrators, I have a few nits about the links. Bitcoin.org belongs under related links as it provide information for Bitcoin in general. Bitcoincore.org is Bitcoin Core's website now.

Also, if you are so against censorship, then bitcointalk and /r/bitcoin should be under related as those two places are related and are places that people are active and get information.

[NorrisK]

It gives a nice overview indeed. It does seem that core is still the way most people want to go.

Are these really all the nodes? Only 6.5k or so left? Lets hope some alternative ways if running a node become available soon.

[Sir Lagsalot]

That there's such an obvious anti-Core bias does not inspire much confidence in your data, colinistheman. The site should describe how data is gathered and explain how it can be verified.

[Zarathustra]

Lots of interesting graphs and charts.

NodeCounter.com

How come bitcoin.org, bitcointalk, bitcoincore.org, r/bitcoin is censored from the site?

N.Korea does not deserve promotion.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Lots of interesting graphs and charts.

NodeCounter.com

How come bitcoin.org, bitcointalk, bitcoincore.org, r/bitcoin is censored from the site?

N.Korea does not deserve promotion.

Clever new way to get around Godwin.

[Amph]

so basically there is no support, minus for core

then those that were saaying miners are for classic were indeed wrong, based on this graph

[Denker]

It gives a nice overview indeed. It does seem that core is still the way most people want to go.

Are these really all the nodes? Only 6.5k or so left? Lets hope some alternative ways if running a node become available soon.

Yes pretty sad right?!Although other sites show the count around 5600-5800 nodes.
That's why it is important to not decrease even more.

https://bitnodes.21.co/

https://bitnodes.21.co/dashboard/?days=365

[Lauda]

How come bitcoin.org, bitcointalk, bitcoincore.org, r/bitcoin is censored from the site?

It's simple actually. The website itself is biased while appearing that it is not. You could just as easily claim that they are censoring those 4 by not including them just as people complained about Coinbase and Bitcoin.org. Let's also not forget that this thread was made in the wrong section.

That there's such an obvious anti-Core bias does not inspire much confidence in your data, colinistheman.

Correct.

Two things:
NodeCounter.com does show Core now.

There's only a single link related to the main implementation. If it was the other way around we would never hear the end of: "censorship, bias, manipulation, etc.". These things are pretty obvious if you pay enough attention.

[shorena]

-snip-
There's only a single link related to the main implementation. If it was the other way around we would never hear the end of: "censorship, bias, manipulation, etc.". These things are pretty obvious if you pay enough attention.

Might have been another update, but they link 32/64-bit windows/linux, osx and the source code same as with all other implementations, besides unlimited, because they apparently lack a osx version.

IMHO a log scale would be nice, because you can hardly see the other implementations besides core.

[blunderer]

https://coin.dance/nodes

[Lauda]

Might have been another update, but they link 32/64-bit windows/linux, osx and the source code same as with all other implementations, besides unlimited, because they apparently lack a osx version.

It would make sense to provide better information since that is the purpose of the website.

IMHO a log scale would be nice, because you can hardly see the other implementations besides core.

Yes. Even though the colors help with that, the others are barely visible. It would also be nice to know which version are the users running though.

[shorena]

Might have been another update, but they link 32/64-bit windows/linux, osx and the source code same as with all other implementations, besides unlimited, because they apparently lack a osx version.

It would make sense to provide better information since that is the purpose of the website.

Well as you said its pretty obvious that they have a specific agenda or stance towards the different implementations.

IMHO a log scale would be nice, because you can hardly see the other implementations besides core.

Yes. Even though the colors help with that, the others are barely visible. It would also be nice to know which version are the users running though.

The pie chart is handy for that, but it lacks the development over time.

[European Central Bank]

Screw nodes. Let's see blocks mined. That's the vote that really counts.

[unamis76]

This change made sense... The website ended up not being about counting XT nodes only Pretty interesting visual overhaul, much easier to navigate now

[KillerHurdz]

Might have been another update, but they link 32/64-bit windows/linux, osx and the source code same as with all other implementations, besides unlimited, because they apparently lack a osx version.

It would make sense to provide better information since that is the purpose of the website.

Well as you said its pretty obvious that they have a specific agenda or stance towards the different implementations.

IMHO a log scale would be nice, because you can hardly see the other implementations besides core.

Yes. Even though the colors help with that, the others are barely visible. It would also be nice to know which version are the users running though.

The pie chart is handy for that, but it lacks the development over time.

Log charts are now present on https://coin.dance/nodes/all.

[franky1]

nodecounter and other sites have wrongly clumped things together when they done the 1mb vs 2mb.. so here is a fairer overview



remember nodes over a year old cannot be automatically classed as desiring 1mb.. they have not shown any direction since the debate has begun, so best to leave them outside in a undecided category