Litecoin v. Bitcoin

[MarketNeutral]

Litecoin has a far stronger network than other altcoins, and network strength is important to merchants, and merchant acceptance is important for a coin's vitality and success.


When I encounter merchant sites that accept cryptocurrencies, the most common one I see accepted is Bitcoin obviously, then followed by Litecoin and distantly by Dogecoin.

[toknormal]

Yeah, no use at all, only a quarter of Bitcoin's trading volume:
http://coinmarketcap.com

That isn't trading volume from usage. It's volume from speculative trading in high liquidity markets.

That's LTC's main raison d'etre at the moment - feeding day traders requirements. So the fact that it has a high trading volume doesn't mean jack for its long term future.

[MikeCoin]

I mainly only use litecoin for accepting payments then exchange into btc.

[Hope78]

The main difference is price and transactions time (lower price and fast transactions, in case of litecoins):

Litecoin can handle a higher volume of transactions thanks to its faster block generation. If bitcoin were to try to match this, it would require significant updates to the code that everyone on the bitcoin network is currently running.

The disadvantage of this higher volume of blocks is that the litecoin blockchain will be proportionately larger than bitcoin's, with more orphaned blocks.

The faster block time of litecoin reduces the risk of double spending attacks – this is theoretical in the case of both networks having the same hashing power.

A merchant who waited for a minimum of two confirmations would only need to wait five minutes, whereas they would have to wait 10 minutes for just one confirmation with bitcoin.

[MarketNeutral]

Yeah, no use at all, only a quarter of Bitcoin's trading volume:
http://coinmarketcap.com

That isn't trading volume from usage. It's volume from speculative trading in high liquidity markets.

That's LTC's main raison d'etre at the moment - feeding day traders requirements. So the fact that it has a high trading volume doesn't mean jack for its long term future.

Actually, it does "mean jack" since volume, even speculation-driven volume, is more likely to attract merchants than a coin with lower volume. Merchant adoption is vital to a coin's success. Velocity and liquidity are challenging without high volume. And in terms of pure speculation, there's a psychological role Litecoin plays by being the cryptocurrency that traders use as a counterpoint to Bitcoin and as a benchmark by which to measure other altcoins.

People complain that Litecoin development is lacking or slow or somehow weak. Regardless of whether that is true, consider that many people prefer the "hands off" or "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach the Litecoin developers take, especially as a contrast to what many people consider to be Bitcoin's overactive and unnecessarily "hands on" development.

[BTCreward]

Litecoin is notable because it was the first alt-coin.
...

^ False.


Namecoin was the first altcoin of any note (IIRC, there were a few sort-of-altcoins before Namecoin, but Namecoin is effectively the first alt).

I think litecoin was the first non-PoW that was created. Both were forks of Bitcoin, but litecoin had a lesser chance of success because of it's inability to be merged mined with bitcoin.

I personally would not consider any other altcoin to be even remotely safe to use and would never consider doing as much

Litecoin is PoW; specifically scrypt instead of bitcoin's sha256.

While Namecoin had an explicit purpose that was different than Bitcoin's, Litecoin was more of a technical and market exercise to see what would happen if you tweaked a few parameters and launched a new chain. Obviously (or at least, it should be obvious), the parameter tweaks (supply, conf-time, mining alg) don't matter in the longrun. I think that's becoming more and more obvious, finally, even to the fairly thick-headed among us.

Right the main difference between the two is scrypt verses SHA256. The "purpose" of ltc was to experiment with scrypt which was suppose to be something that ASICs could not use, which as of now is not the case. The long term result will mean that both networks will be dominated by large ASIC farms securing the network yet bitcoin will be much more secure

[BitCoinNutJob]

Always need a number 2 crypto to trade vs, litecoin is the best #2

[Troonetpt]

Always need a number 2 crypto to trade vs, litecoin is the best #2

the reason is a joke.

[Melbustus]

...
The "purpose" of ltc was to experiment with scrypt which was suppose to be something that ASICs could not use, which as of now is not the case.
...

I doubt Charles was so thick as to assert that scrypt-mining was ASIC-*proof* ("resistant", sure, since that's a relative term). Many of us have been pointing out for years that any successful PoW coin, no matter what alg or set of algs it used, would eventually experience industrialized data-center-scale mining (which does not necessarily destroy the essence of a decentralized cryptocoin, btw) where various large operations compete based on marginal electricity cost and possibly the synergy of vertically integrated services. This is an obvious economic inevitability.

Of course, litecoiners and the greater alt-community were generally quite thick-headed for years and needed this empirically proven to them through the *actuality* of scrypt-asics. I don't know why people can't extrapolate, but then again, I don't understand a lot about how people in the alt-community "think".

[muhrohmat]

litecoin values 4 dollars bitcoin values 80x more litecoin very secure and some alt scoins are gettin even better in security bitcoin by the dollar value amount is triyng to be hacked the wallets

[xxmasta]

litecoin is pretty much dead now. It's worth about 1.8$.

bitcoin has fallen about 70% the last few months and is unsteady. bitcoin might still have a future though.

[Dilemma]

allright my answer is bitcoin
litecoin and all other subcoins are for short term
its my opinion, maybe i m wrong but i think they will die in previous years..

[turvarya]

I think, I have 5 LTC laying around.
I think it will stay that way, I neither think, they will raise nor is it any use to sell them.
I still keep the address since 1. you never know and 2. for sentimental(first alt-coin I ever had)

[Sage]

Ah, I love all this pessimism.... cheap coins for me.

"Principle of maximum pessimism"

google it...

Yes, LTC is dead for sure.  Sell.... sell... sell...

I'll take them off your hands just as a public service -- with no profit motive whatsoever -- cause that's the kinda guy I am

[BitCoinNutJob]

litecoin is pretty much dead now. It's worth about 1.8$.

bitcoin has fallen about 70% the last few months and is unsteady. bitcoin might still have a future though.

litecoin dropped to $1.1 before moving to $50, the variance is always even bigger with litecoin.

[VectorChief]

People shouldn't be judging coins based on the price alone.

Prices have cycles. If somethng gets pumped up 10x-20x in a matter of days, it is reasonable to expect that it will then keep sliding down for some time. Litecoin currently has higher inflation rate, as it is almost 3 years yunger than Bitcoin, which is a lot for an overall 6 year span of the whole crypto-space. But it also means that Litecoin's initial distribution is happening at the higher level of public awareness and there is still more than half of all litecoins available for permission-less extraction.

Another reason for Litecoin to exist is to somewhat decentralize software development and distribution. Although there are multiple Bitcoin wallets and clients, there is still only one popular Bitcoin core client and core team with a single choke point of SW distribution which might get corrupted. Litecoin adds a bit of a competitive push to rectify the situation. It doesn't need to have more features to accomplish that, but simply having a different core team and a separate SW distribution channel is good enough. The fact that Litecoin core client stays one version behind Bitcoin is another indication that Litecoin is a good backup plan for Bitcoin, which is a nice thing to have, as it allows Bitcoin to be more brave and take on the challenges it otherwise wouldn't.

Even if only one of these coins gets wide merchant adoption, good liquidity and high trading volume between the two still allows to buy products and services with just one extra hop. I see the multiplicity of a few robust and healthy coins competing and backing each other as yet another aspect of decentralization in crypto-space.

[allthingsluxury]

Litecoin had some initial and then re-surged success, although it is very dormant atm compared to bitcoin.

[VectorChief]

Litecoin had some initial and then re-surged success, although it is very dormant atm compared to bitcoin.

When price fluctuates too much people complain about volatility.
When price is finally stable, people call it dormant and get bored.

But the good thing is that people (me included) always find something to talk about.
You can't change that!

[mlferro]

I am so confused.

What is better?  Which one do you guys recommend more?

Thank you for your time

I have no doubt in saying, BTC is clearly better than LTC.
Various reasons mentioned above. Just want to add, it is easier to achieve (satoshis)

[ChuckBuck]

Stick to Bitcoin, there's no development or VC investments fawning over Litecoin at all.

Just pretend Litecoin is a scamcoin like Doge, Paycoin, Ripple, etc...it's not going anywhere anytime soon.

Especially once it decoupled from Bitcoin last year.

Just no incentive really to pay attention to it.  Just ask yourself this.  Does Microsoft, Overstock, Newegg, Expedia, soon to be Paypal accept Litecoin?  If the answer is no to all, then fuggedaboutit.