I'm a long-time user. I've followed the development of many wallets: some died, new ones emerged, others updated, got better, got worse... but when it comes to UX, most fail, especially in how they present receiving addresses to users:
Normally, in older versions of Electrum (<4.0), Electrum
provided a Bitcoin address right away, description, amounts fields, where there was a
dynamic QR code that changed as the user filled in the fields...
Now, in Electrum 4.0 versions,
the address is no longer presented right away, and the QR code as well,
that is static. You have to click on
Request to view the next address, to generate a QR code with description and amounts, you have to fill in the fields and click "Request", but a new address is generated every time you click "Request," and right below, a
list of Requests appears. You can set the expiration of each Requests, delete them, but you cannot edit them (description, request amount, etc). You are forced to gen a new request with a new address every time...
The problem is that this makes me lose control of my addresses and others problemns, besides that, I have to press many buttons to: gen new requests, delete expired requests... this creates immense confusion for beginners, because beginners will think that Bitcoin addresses expire, when is not true.
When requests expire or you delete them, the addresses generated by those requests go back to being shown again if you generate new requests again.
In Bitcoin Core, it works similarly, but here, once you click on "Create new receiving address" the addresses are not displayed again. If you want to access the address that was generated previously, you have to go to the list of
Receiving Addresses and copy the address, but you can no longer generate QR Codes with that same address again, nor change the amount, new Bitcoin URI, etc... question:
why is that, developers?It seems that theses wallets treat their wallet addresses as "Invoices," meaning they generate a new invoice (new address) every time the user clicks Receive/Request... some users (like me and I believe more people too) want to see again
EXACTLY a specific address and generate URIs, QR Codes for that address... why not?
Bitcoin addresses are not invoices. The UX of Bitcoin Core's receive tab is ugly. The "Requested payments history" list, the requested address is not even displayed (you have to click on the Request to see the QR Code), and the QR code is static for that label, amount, and message filled in by the user at the time the invoice was generated... why is that?
In many cases, the user won't receive Bitcoin exactly at the moment they request a new address, they are testing the wallet, getting familiar with it. In the past, Bitcoin Core had an option for you to generate a bitcoin URI with previous addresses (you had to check a checkbox). They removed it. Why? Why? This doesn't represent any threat to security and privacy (unless you know what you are doing). It's not the first topic I've brought up about wallet usability, but it seems that with each new version of these wallets, the developers remove features without consulting the users themselves. Why not just leave what already simply works?
Do you also have this impression?For those who read this far and still haven't understood my point, I miss having the feature of dynamic QR Codes in wallets (which changes as the user fills in/edits the label, amount, etc, fields) or of generating a request for an address generated previously that HAS NOT YET BEEN USED. That's what I'd like to see back. But the impression I have is that, especially these 02 wallets, they remove or depreciate features without consulting users.
You don't remove features unless they are replaced by a better one or without consulting users first.
I'm venting here because I'm a user who thinks about my practicality. I want logical solutions without the need to press more clicks when I can solve them or create them with 1 or 2 clicks....
Developers, understand that you removed features that already worked very well and efficiently and replaced them with interfaces where the user has to click on more options (right-click) to access the same feature that was previously easily accessed with a few clicks. For instance: They removed dynamic QR Codes, now they treat addresses as invoices (
they are not invoices and never should be). I don't want to repeat the address, but I also don't want the interface to generate new addresses
WITHOUT CONSULTING ME OR WITHOUT ME CLEARLY INTERACTING TO GENERATE a new address.
And why am I focusing on dynamic QR Codes?
Because it's very useful for the merchant or seller who interacts with multiple people at once. Let's do an analysis with credit card POS machines: you enter the amount to be charged and it shows a QR Code for the customer to pay (if your country has an instant payment option like PIX, Zelle, etc), and some wallets don't even have this characteristic anymore, they just drop the address on the interface, and the payer has to enter the amount.
