Bitcoin is not, never was, and never will be suitable for microtransactions, and was never intended to be. Transaction fees are meant to cover the cost of mining (which will become increasingly important as the block subsidy continues to drop). Since the cost of processing a transaction is totally independent on the value transferred, so is the fee. If the value of a transaction is so small that the required fee is a large percentage of it, that's just too damn bad.
thanks for clarifying. actually i've indeed gone wrong thinking that the cost of a transaction is an inverse of the total amount of hasing power available "as the block subsidy continues to drop".
still, what i'd like to question is the view on "how sth. is meant to be used". just because something was not invented with a particular use-case in mind doesn't mean that there should never be a demand for another use-aspect or simply put, some improvement to use something more broadly, so your statement what will or will not be seems superficial as long as the world keeps turning
i mean lets assume the world goes crazy about
BTC and its value rises to 10.000 $ per BTC, would that suddenly justify microtransactions and make
BTC suitable for microtransactions? how come? well, new aspects come into play and so...
i thought there'd be a reason for such a fine granularity of
BTC (stoshi) but again, since i am still rather new to cryptocurrencies... i might have misunderstood something.
anyway, please don't get me wrong, i certainly don't want to criticise here. my intention is to learn and gain experiences and my tools for doing so are questioning questionable things.
cheers, pm