What needs to be improved or added to your preferred BTC Wallet?

[Forsyth Jones]

What comes to mind now is that 99% of wallets only offer a single form of backup: via the BIP39 recovery phrase, which in itself is a complete backup that will restore your wallet and coins.

However, we must take the following into consideration: most wallets don't make it clear which derivation path they use, and depending on the wallet the user uses to restore the wallet, they will restore addresses from another derivation path in which their UTXO is not allocated.

Therefore, it'd be better if the most popular wallets considered descriptor support, so that users with technical knowledge can describe to the wallet exactly which derivation path the wallet should restore.

Another alternative would be more than one backup alternative, such as an exportable keystore encrypted with a user-defined password, where in this file you would specify the derivation path, public keys, WIFs, xprivs and everything necessary to restore the wallet in the future.

Visit this site and you will get what I am saying: https://walletsrecovery.org/ (The specified information is out of date)

[1714280383]

1714280383

[Pmalek]

However, we must take the following into consideration: most wallets don't make it clear which derivation path they use, and depending on the wallet the user uses to restore the wallet, they will restore addresses from another derivation path in which their UTXO is not allocated.

Popular wallets show the derivation paths somewhere in their settings, but you are right about this. For instance, I was surprised that Trezor Suite didn't display the derivation paths for bitcoin accounts until recently. Luckily, we do have sources like WalletsRecovery, and you can always google the issue, and chances are that you will find the information somewhere. Asking support is another way to find out.

Most of the wallets we use and recommend on this forum use standard derivation paths and one or two alternatives. It's with closed-source and untrusted wallets where problems with unknown derivation paths appear. And those shouldn't be used in the first place.

[satscraper]

My preferred BTC wallet is Passport 2 which unbeatable in my view  , but, as one can understand, it must be paired with some software companion  for which Sparrow  is used by me. The only thing I would wish for Sparrow right now is the option for OP_RETURN payment, which I would use to store some valuable (for me) text on blockchain. But, unfortunately,  craigraw still remains reluctant for adding this feature to Sparrow.

[Pmalek]

My preferred BTC wallet is Passport 2 which unbeatable in my view  , but, as one can understand, it must be paired with some software companion  for which Sparrow  is used by me. The only thing I would wish for Sparrow right now is the option for OP_RETURN payment, which I would use to store some valuable (for me) text on blockchain. But, unfortunately,  craigraw still remains reluctant for adding this feature to Sparrow.

You can use Electrum in the meantime to create your OP_RETURN transactions. Passport Foundation supports the Electrum Wallet. Some older posts I found on the forum related to the subject say that you can use OP_return in the GUI, it's not available from the console.

If that's not you who requested the feature on Sparrow's GitHub, try doing it. They might add it in the future if they notice there is enough interest.

[satscraper]

My preferred BTC wallet is Passport 2 which unbeatable in my view  , but, as one can understand, it must be paired with some software companion  for which Sparrow  is used by me. The only thing I would wish for Sparrow right now is the option for OP_RETURN payment, which I would use to store some valuable (for me) text on blockchain. But, unfortunately,  craigraw still remains reluctant for adding this feature to Sparrow.

You can use Electrum in the meantime to create your OP_RETURN transactions. Passport Foundation supports the Electrum Wallet. Some older posts I found on the forum related to the subject say that you can use OP_return in the GUI, it's not available from the console.

If that's not you who requested the feature on Sparrow's GitHub, try doing it. They might add it in the future if they notice there is enough interest.

I'm aware of the  availability of OP_RETURN in Electrum by using this script instead destination address in the payment field . But unfortunately Electrum  can't be paired with Passport via QR code. The only option is to pare them via PSBT file. This is one of the reasons for my Sparrow bias. I will wait, as it seems that craigraw is gradually shifted to the OP_RETURN-mindedness.

[Pmalek]

I'm aware of the  availability of OP_RETURN in Electrum by using this script instead destination address in the payment field . But unfortunately Electrum  can't be paired with Passport via QR code. The only option is to pare them via PSBT file.

That is unfortunate. The Electrum wallet supports QR codes, but probably only as a way to import addresses and keys. Seeing how popular Passport has become, the Electrum devs will surely add the missing functionality at some point in the future.

Anyways, I believe you are a privacy advocate and you run your own node. Sparrow offers more in the privacy department than Electrum.

[pooya87]

However, we must take the following into consideration: most wallets don't make it clear which derivation path they use, and depending on the wallet the user uses to restore the wallet, they will restore addresses from another derivation path in which their UTXO is not allocated.

Even if they make it clear (which most of them do) the user still needs to investigate to figure out their derivation path. Not to mention that sometimes people forget what  wallet they were using in first place.

This means a better solution to fix this problem is to change the BIP39 algorithm itself not wallets. That way we can address a couple of shortcomings in this algorithm and add extra features. It could be some extra bits at the beginning that would increase the word count in each mnemonic by one but could contain a lot of information including the derivation path.

[Forsyth Jones]

-

Yes, I myself can find out where the UTXO are without difficulty, as the best known are M/0, M/0H, M/44H/, M/49H..., M/84 and 86 (few support the last 4 scripts together).

Bitcoin Core (legacy wallet) and Electrum use derivation paths from the beginning of bip32. Recently Bitcoin core adopted the BIP39 standard (without mnemonic).

At the time, I tried to restore the wallet created in bitcoin core through xpriv on Electrum, out of curiosity and I was unable to do so. Even getting the derivation patch right.

Regarding the shortcomings of BIP39, electrum already contains a seed indicating the version number in the seed itself indicating what type of addresses to generate, but only it uses its own standard. Which I don't technically get how it works and how the electrum seed version is better than the BIP39 as they claim.


https://electrum.readthedocs.io/en/latest/seedphrase.html#motivation

[pooya87]

Which I don't technically get how it works and how the electrum seed version is better than the BIP39 as they claim.

It's pretty straight forward. You compute HMACSHA512 of the normalized mnemonic with "Seed version" as HMAC key and then check the first couple of bits of the result to determine the version. Based on that version you derive a different type of address.

During seed generation, this version is found through brute forcing. Behind the scene Electrum generates 132 bits of entropy then computes the version as I explained, it if is of the type you wanted it is accepted; otherwise the entropy is incremented and the loop continues until it is.

It is better than BIP39 because the user doesn't have to manually tell the wallet what type of addresses it should derive from the given mnemonic.

[PrivacyG]

Electrum warns you to never disclose it, or type it in a website, or store it electronically in general; it also tells you to save it on paper and with the correct order. That's the only wallet software I can think of that I'd recommend it to a newbie. I just checked Sparrow and it does not warn enough for a newbie, but I'd never suggest it in the first place. It contains a lot of complicated terminology like "script types", "policy types", "keystores" etc., that would confuse them. Bitcoin Core is another newbie unfriendly wallet, and it neither supports a seed phrase standard.

I agree.  Sparrow is not very beginner friendly and would confuse them very badly.

Do you know these sort of 'chat bubbles' you get on many Applications the first time you install?  They usually explain what each button does.  I think such an implementation of helpful tips would help so much.

[dkbit98]

Electrum and Sparrow wallets are great bitcoin wallets for me but they are not perfect.
For both of them I would add additional support for Liquid assets L-BTC and L-USDT, and for Sparrow wallet could also add Lightning network and mobile version.
For multicoin wallets like Unstappable biggest problem I have is no coin control, and that is must have feature for me.

Sparrow is not very beginner friendly and would confuse them very badly.

Bitcoin is also not so beginner friendly 
I don't see anything complicated to understand with Sparrow, and it's better to learn the difference from start between running your own node and using server from other people.
However, if someone wants a dead simple wallet I would suggest Aqua wallet, even senior citizens can use it easily.

[BlackHatCoiner]

It is better than BIP39 because the user doesn't have to manually tell the wallet what type of addresses it should derive from the given mnemonic.

That's a feature of BIP39, though, not a bug. And I'd say that it is trivial to know which type of address you used, given the wallet software and a search engine. 

I don't see anything complicated to understand with Sparrow, and it's better to learn the difference from start between running your own node and using server from other people.

I agree. I'm absolutely in favor of knowing the implications of using a third party to serve your transactions. However, it does contain a lot of technical terminology like "script type" that a newbie doesn't need to know. Electrum was a pretty easy to learn, speaking out of experience. Sparrow was better as an upgrade, but I wouldn't have picked this up since day 1, as I did with Electrum.

[shield132]

I created this topic to leave our feedback, compliments, suggestions and dissatisfactions about the main BTC wallets (BTC Only or not), in order to exchange ideas on what needs to be added and/or improved in them.

For example, if you really like a wallet, but it is not open source, you can highlight this point here, or if you think that some function within your wallet does not make sense, you can mention that.

Another example: I think the XYZ wallet is very safe, but it does not have the option to set fees manually (sat/vbyte), instead, the fee options offered by the wallet are either too high or too low (bitcoin wallet for android).

Every famous open-source crypto wallet lacks a UI/UX design and some of them don't have applications for smartphones. I personally use Electrum and its mobile app is terrible, and far from intuitive. Windows app looks like an old application from Windows XP times.
Long story short, every Bitcoin wallet needs to do more UI/UX research and create more intuitive design and they need good smartphone app. I would also love to see timelock feature on crypto wallets because it's sometimes hard to HODL and locking your bitcoin for years is the best way for those who lack self-control.

[m2017]

It seems to me that bitcoinwallets lack the functions that blockchain.com / blockexplorer.com, bitcoinfees.earn.com websites provides, such as a transaction explorer, mempool weight, bitcoin fees and time to confirm a transaction. It would be nice to have similar information in the adjacent tabs of the bitcoin wallet, but I think that it would “weight down” the wallet and make it bulky and clumsy, which combine applications become.

I would like to see this in bitcoin wallets, rather than looking for the necessary information on third-party websites, which, as we know, don't hesitate to collect information about visitors.

[internetional]

In all LN wallets for mobile devices, I would be happy to see an option which is currently present in Blixt only: persistent online mode. It is necessary for incoming payments, so I find it weird that not each mobile wallet provides this option. I used to think it is impossible at all, but if it is realized in Blixt, so I think it must be possible in other wallets, too.

In Blixt itself, I miss non-taproot addresses for incoming onchain transfers. Not every wallet can send bitcoins to P2TR addresses yet.

[Forsyth Jones]

Every famous open-source crypto wallet lacks a UI/UX design and some of them don't have applications for smartphones. I personally use Electrum and its mobile app is terrible, and far from intuitive. Windows app looks like an old application from Windows XP times.
Long story short, every Bitcoin wallet needs to do more UI/UX research and create more intuitive design and they need good smartphone app. I would also love to see timelock feature on crypto wallets because it's sometimes hard to HODL and locking your bitcoin for years is the best way for those who lack self-control.

Trezor Suite has the best UI in my opinion, but when it comes to UX, Electrum and Bitcoin Core are more objective. It has the Send, Receive button, I just think that both Electrum and Bitcoin core should return to having dynamic QR Codes, when changing the amount or description the QR is instantly updated instead of clicking on "create new receiving address" and a new QR Code.

About Electrum's retro UI, this pleases me, because remembering graphical interfaces from the XP era is very nostalgic, electrum reminds me of those password managers like Keepass.

It seems to me that bitcoinwallets lack the functions that blockchain.com / blockexplorer.com, bitcoinfees.earn.com websites provides, such as a transaction explorer, mempool weight, bitcoin fees and time to confirm a transaction. It would be nice to have similar information in the adjacent tabs of the bitcoin wallet, but I think that it would “weight down” the wallet and make it bulky and clumsy, which combine applications become.

I would like to see this in bitcoin wallets, rather than looking for the necessary information on third-party websites, which, as we know, don't hesitate to collect information about visitors.

Well, Sparrow has an integrated block explorer, do you already know it?

[pooya87]

It is better than BIP39 because the user doesn't have to manually tell the wallet what type of addresses it should derive from the given mnemonic.

That's a feature of BIP39, though, not a bug. And I'd say that it is trivial to know which type of address you used, given the wallet software and a search engine. 

It is more like lack of feature and I wouldn't call it a bug either. We could consider it as a shortcoming of BIP39.

As for knowing the address type, it is not as trivial as you think for newbies who don't even know there are different types of addresses. It is best to make things easier for end users anyway, specially when it is so easy to implement (like what Electrum has done).

[Upgrade00]

I personally use Electrum and its mobile app is terrible, and far from intuitive. Windows app looks like an old application from Windows XP times.

Electrum mobile has improved well over the past two years. Previously the Gap in features between the mobile and desktop version was very wide, but that gap has closed down significantly
For the retro look on the desktop version, it seems fitting with other things like the forum and Bitcoin core as well.

[Synchronice]

While Bitcoin is a modern currency and future of the money, its wallets luck modernity and that's strange. Bitcoin wallets look very old, I mean, their visual aspect and user experience standards don't meet the modern demand, instead, they are mostly created for developers who don't care about visual side and functionality is the most important factor.
For example, Sparrow, that looks way better than Electrum, seems to be harder to use then Electrum because of probably a bad infrastructure but looks more modern than Electrum.

By the way, I'll ask here, who created this app? https://play.google.com/store/apps/dev?id=5750589945930020869

[Forsyth Jones]

While Bitcoin is a modern currency and future of the money, its wallets luck modernity and that's strange. Bitcoin wallets look very old, I mean, their visual aspect and user experience standards don't meet the modern demand, instead, they are mostly created for developers who don't care about visual side and functionality is the most important factor.
For example, Sparrow, that looks way better than Electrum, seems to be harder to use then Electrum because of probably a bad infrastructure but looks more modern than Electrum.

By the way, I'll ask here, who created this app? https://play.google.com/store/apps/dev?id=5750589945930020869

Answering you about the link, it seems to be the schildbatch wallet, it's known by the old guard because of the developer's name: Andreas Schildbatch, it was the first mobile wallet that existed and I consider it one of the safest. However, the schildbacth wallet is limited in features that I consider essential, such as customizing fees, this has already been suggested on the project's github, but the developer considers it advanced and that this is a wallet for beginner users.

Commenting on what I think about the UI of wallets like Electrum and Sparrow, as I said, these wallets are more suitable for experienced users who don't care about UI issues, however some wallets like Ledger that have a modern and beautiful UI, have several options that I consider useless, such as the buy button, exchange button and the essential send and receive buttons are mixed between these buttons, I think the main function of a self-respecting wallet is to send and receive, there is no need to invent trends.

I believe that a user who has never used a ledger finds it strange to see a bunch of buttons and it takes time to find the send and receive button, in addition, both the send and receive buttons, when clicking on them, go through a useless verification process, why complicate things? If I click on receive, I want the address to appear immediately so I can copy and check the address on the device. So UI isn't everything, it's essential that the wallet has a good UX too.