3 basic questions regarding electrum.

[Thomas29]

I was super sleep deprived making this post. I can't delete it so I will ask a few questions I guess... 1st question the description for RBF transactions is pretty vague so I'm unsure if I should enable that setting or leave it disabled? 2nd question is should I disable "output value rounding" as it says at most 100 satoshis might be lost due to this per transaction but I don't know how much USD loss that would potentially be?

3rd is the newer version 4.2.0 have a big difference?


Again since I can't delete my own post I made sleep deprived not thinking correctly I figured I'd ask for your opinions regarding these 3 questions?

[OmegaStarScream]

There's nothing to install when using the portable version, you just run the downloaded executable.

Have you tried to check your anti-virus? maybe it got detected as false positive and removed?

[Thomas29]

Thanks for the reply truly. I was freaking out prematurely making this post that wasn't needed.

[Charles-Tim]

I am surprised that the lasted version is now 4.2.0, how come you downloaded version 4.1.5 when version 4.2.0 is the default download.

I don't what other details to give (LMK anymore info that'll help?) other than I can't find the "start .exe file for the portable version?

If you want the setup to be downloaded on your device, click on Windows Installer instead of Portable Version.

https://electrum.org/#download

As OmegaStarScream commented, anti-malware may caused this.

[stadus]

Thanks for the reply truly. I was freaking out prematurely making this post that wasn't needed.

If you will install something, you might get the wrong app and it will only steal your account, be careful with that, I was a victim of phishing before when there's a prompt in my wallet to update but I didn't know I was predicted to a wrong site and downloaded a wrong app.

[OmegaStarScream]

Thanks for the reply truly. I was freaking out prematurely making this post that wasn't needed.

You should've kept your first question, in case someone else faces the same problem. Anyway, to answer your other questions:

1. You should keep RBF enabled. This will allow you to increase the fees and also cancel your transaction (before it gets confirmed) if needed.
2. Output value rounding is a privacy feature. See this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5235897.msg54109661#msg54109661
3. It's always better to use the latest version. Here's Electrum's changelog: https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/blob/master/RELEASE-NOTES

It's worth mentioning that some platforms (like Changelly IIRC) do not accept RBF transactions so it's better to pay enough fees from the start instead of bumping them.

[Thomas29]

So the the vague description for RBF works alongside "replace by fee" option the vague description btw is "your unconfirmed transactions will be consolidated into a single transaction. this will save fees"

RBF is disabled upon installation by default so I'd be enabling it?


The original question was a sleep deprived confused misunderstanding fyi thanks again.

[nc50lc]

You don't have to delete your post once it got answered, users in the web who are looking for support may be able to use it for reference.

1st question the description for RBF transactions is pretty vague so I'm unsure if I should enable that setting or leave it disabled?

It's to flag your transactions as "replaceable" but only until it's mined, useful in cases where you need to increase the fee by replacing it with a higher fee transaction or if you've sent it to the wrong address.
If it's enabled, "increase fee" and "cancel transaction" right-click options in the history tab will be available for txns created after it's enabled.

The downsides that I can think of are: some services that doesn't support RBF may not credit your deposits if you've used RBF to increase the fee;
and some exchange/casino with zero-confirmation deposits wont grant that feature to transactions with RBF flag.

2nd question is should I disable "output value rounding" as it says at most 100 satoshis might be lost due to this per transaction but I don't know how much USD loss that would potentially be?

One satoshi is equal to 0.00000001 BTC; so "at most" 100sat is currently about 4 cents (USD).

[Thomas29]

already enabled ”Use Replace-By-Fee” And Below that option there is ”Batch RBF transactions” So im unsure if I should tick that one as well.

I've used electrum with only "use replace-by-fee" has done & is described to do exactly your telling me "Batcj RBF transactions" will do?


I'm confused with more questions than I had before... again as I said I'm sleep deprived though so I'll return later to read this.

[o_e_l_e_o]

already enabled ”Use Replace-By-Fee” And Below that option there is ”Batch RBF transactions” So im unsure if I should tick that one as well.

I've used electrum with only "use replace-by-fee" has done & is described to do exactly your telling me "Batcj RBF transactions" will do?

"Use Replace-By-Fee" will allow you to enable RBF on your transactions. This will allow you to replace unconfirmed transactions, which will allow you to bump the fee, redirect the money elsewhere, or attempt to cancel the transaction by sending it back to yourself if it is not yet confirmed.

"Batch RBF transactions" means that if you have any unconfirmed transactions in your wallet waiting to be confirmed, and you create a new transaction (either brand new or a RBF of an existing transaction), then your wallet will consolidate all your unconfirmed RBF enabled transactions together in to one big transaction. The advantage of this is that it will save you on fees, but the disadvantage is that it is bad for your privacy.

[nc50lc]

already enabled ”Use Replace-By-Fee” And Below that option there is ”Batch RBF transactions” So im unsure if I should tick that one as well.
-snip-

If unsure, just keep the default settings as it's set to maximize privacy while keeping the best features enabled;
With that "Batch RBF transactions" is disabled by default.

[Thomas29]

o_e_l_e_o     Thank you that is a basic answer that makes sense to me.


nc50lc     Whether I'll enable it depends on how much is the maximum amount of fees I'd be saving for a bit less privacy?




Again thank you both truly as this is helpful. I'm still learning about cryptocurrency & everything else associated with using it... specifically bitcoin.




P.S. Even after I reopened my browser that has restore tabs set. I had to push F5 on my keyboard to refresh the page for your replies to show up in the thread. So I never even saw the 1st post until after I realized my sleep deprived mistake. If original post was read before I edited it. You'd know it made no sense & wouldn't help anyone. I forgot to edit the title of the thread I just did it now.

[nc50lc]

nc50lc     Whether I'll enable it depends on how much is the maximum amount of fees I'd be saving for a bit less privacy?

Pretty much yes.

But in most cases, it wont even save you fees.
Since it's generally an "RBF transaction", the replacement (combined transaction) requires an additional fee equivalent to the fee of the to-be-replaced transaction(s), it also needs to pay for its own fee.

Example (testnet - SegWit):

• 1st transaction (rbf: true)
  Size: 144 vBytes | fee: 144 satoshi (@1sat/vB)
  
• Combined transaction (if you send while the setting is enabled and the 1st txn is still unconfirmed)
  Size: 178 vBytes | fee: 322 satoshi = 178 satoshi (@1sat/vB) + 144 satoshi equal to the absolute fee of the replaced transaction
  
• Based form the example, it's actually a bit cheaper if the two transactions are sent separately: each will pay 144 satoshi @1sat/vB.

This setting is good for the network though since the overall transaction size is lower than two separate transactions.
Means that you can help the network to save some block space.

[o_e_l_e_o]

I would recommend having RBF turned on but having batched transactions turned off.

As nc50lc has pointed out, in some cases it won't save you fees at all. It would really be if you had a whole bunch of unconfirmed transactions that you wanted to bump the fee on, then instead of creating an individual bump transaction for them all you could create one large bump transaction. That's a pretty niche use, though, and if you did want to do that in the future you could just turn that feature on before you use it. It's not like RBF itself which you must turn on before you make the first transaction - you can decide to batch your existing unconfirmed RBF transactions at any time if you wanted to.

And yeah, if I've spent 0.001 BTC with a merchant, but then also sent 1 BTC to a cold wallet for savings, then the last thing I want is my wallet to batch those addresses together and make it trivial for the merchant to identify my cold wallet addresses.

[Pmalek]

3rd is the newer version 4.2.0 have a big difference?

Quite a significant change is that Electrum removed support for all versions of the Windows 7 OS. So if you use that outdated version of Windows, you will have to remain on the version 4.1.5 or older to still use Electrum.

Check out this thread for more information > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5391269.0.
Alternatively, read the release notes where this piece of info originates from > https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/blob/master/RELEASE-NOTES.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Quite a significant change is that Electrum removed support for all versions of the Windows 7 OS. So if you use that outdated version of Windows, you will have to remain on the version 4.1.5 or older to still use Electrum.

I wouldn't recommend this. Using Windows at the best of times is risky. Using a version of Windows which has been unsupported for years is extremely risky and leaves you open to many vulnerabilities which could result in loss of your coins. Adding in progressively more outdated wallet software on top of that is an absolutely awful idea.

Isn't the upgrade to Windows 10 still free? If you refuse to leave Windows for a better and more secure Linux OS, then you should at least upgrade to 10 and continue to update Electrum too.

If you can't do all that, then better to live boot to Linux and store your wallet on there than continue to store wallets on Windows 7.

[Pmalek]

I wouldn't recommend this. Using Windows at the best of times is risky. Using a version of Windows which has been unsupported for years is extremely risky and leaves you open to many vulnerabilities which could result in loss of your coins. Adding in progressively more outdated wallet software on top of that is an absolutely awful idea.

I know. It's not a recommendation. It's an alternative (a bad one) for those who don't want to or can't upgrade to a better operating system and for whatever reason want to keep using Windows 7 without switching to Linux or Mac. If that's the case, and they are stuck with Windows 7 and still want to use Electrum, they have to stay with 4.1.5. 

Isn't the upgrade to Windows 10 still free?

It used to be free, then there was a deadline, but you could get it for free even past that deadline. No idea what the situation is now. Doing a search for "is Windows 10 free" returns plenty of results describing how to still go about it.

[Charles-Tim]

Isn't the upgrade to Windows 10 still free? If you refuse to leave Windows for a better and more secure Linux OS, then you should at least upgrade to 10 and continue to update Electrum too.

It is no more free but very possible there is a way to go about it as Pmalek commented. Microsoft free Windows 10 home upgrade is never free anymore since November 2017. Electrum version 4.2.0 still supports Windows 8.1, but Windows will no more support windows 8.1 by January 2023 which is just some months away. I too will recommend updating to Windows 10 home or 10 Pro version or 11 if possible.

If you can't do all that, then better to live boot to Linux and store your wallet on there than continue to store wallets on Windows 7.

Even using Linux would be the best option for any bitcoin user as it is open source.

[RickDeckard]

Isn't the upgrade to Windows 10 still free? If you refuse to leave Windows for a better and more secure Linux OS, then you should at least upgrade to 10 and continue to update Electrum too.

It is no more free but very possible there is a way to go about it as Pmalek commented. Microsoft free Windows 10 home upgrade is never free anymore since November 2017. Electrum version 4.2.0 still supports Windows 8.1, but Windows will no more support windows 8.1 by January 2023 which is just some months away. I too will recommend updating to Windows 10 home or 10 Pro version or 11 if possible.

I was also wondering if the "free" upgrades that Windows gave some years ago were still valid so I decided to check if they were still going on or if they had been terminated. What I found out is that, apparently, it's still possible to update (from Windows 7 in this case) to Windows 10 for free[1] - the user has the flag of "Windows Insider MVP"[2] so I'm assuming this information is correct. If you still intend to upgrade to Windows 10 - the installer will convert your Windows 7 license[3] - you'll have to download and run the tool that Microsoft provides here[4]. In either case you choose - keep the files and just upgrade Windows or a clean install - I would always make a backup of my data, or at least the most sensible information, so that no surprises happen.
[1]https://libreddit.spike.codes/r/Windows10/comments/qprk9z/is_windows_7_to_10_upgrade_still_free/
[2]https://insider.windows.com/en-us/mvps
[3]https://libreddit.spike.codes/r/Windows10/comments/eoux7s/how_will_updating_from_windows_7_to_10_affect_me/fefdmb8/
[4]https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/software-download/windows10