- Solana’s beta status is actually anachronistic, because the company is a leader in terms of the number of active customers and the transaction volume.
- But transparency problems and concerns about customer diversity ensure that Solanada is repeatedly new – and as long as it is, it remains “beta”.
The fact that Solana continues to use the term “beta” five years after the start has once again caused criticism despite its growing dominance in the blockchain area. The CEO of Helius Labs, Mert Mumtaz, reacted to it and defended the name while he rejected the concerns of skeptics.
The debate has disclosed profound concerns within the community in terms of transparency, reliability and direction of development. While the critics indicate unresolved problems, Solana’s supporters argue that his performance testifies more than the label.
Mumaz defends Solana’s beta tag as symbolic
In a recently published article X the CEO of Helius Labs, Mert Mumtaz, played down the importance of the beta marking of the Solana main network and therefore described the excitement as arbitrary and meaningless. He argued that the metrics of the network-such as the leading transaction volume and the active addresses-make the beta name irrelevant.
According to Mumtaz, Solana is currently generating more sales than other blockchains. He claimed that the criticism stirred from the fear of the growing influence of Solana in the cryptor compartment.
So although Solana is still officially in the beta phase, it is actively used in real applications. However, the network is constantly being technically improved, and there is no official schedule for the cancellation of beta status.
Critics argue that this extended phase enables the team to deny responsibility in the event of failures. The pseudonymous analyst Balarchrex questioned why Solana uses beta status defensively when the network fails. He argued that if the beta title has no meaning, it should not be mentioned in the event of failures.
Criticism of transparency and variety of customers
Balarchrex also pointed out the lack of transparency of the Solana Foundation in relation to the wallet. He said the amount of the SOL held by the foundation was not known, which could affect the trust of the institutional investors.
The fear is that large token dumps could harm the small investors. This is done at a time when the interests of institutional investors are record-breaking: Sol strategies announced a $ 500-million change bond to increase its SOL stocks, and Galaxy Digital increased his engagement in Solana.
The debate tightened when Balarchrex Solana criticized due to a lack of customer diversity. He said that the network had only had a single original customer since it was founded. Agave and Jito-agave are only splitting of the original code, he said.
Mumtaz replied that two independent teams who work on Forks will not be a restriction. He said that Solana will not follow the Ethereum approach of the open house in terms of client variety.
As CNF reports, Solana receives both criticism and praise. Market performance and institutional support are strong, but the transparency problems and the extended beta phase are still a big block on and constant criticisms. While the network is developing, the debate about its decisions will continue.
No Comments