- Solana's architecture limits its ability to achieve the decentralization required for a global backbone.
- Ethereum will lead as the financial backbone and dominate layer 1 as the foundation for L2 solutions.
- High bandwidth needs and centralized management hinder Solana's scalability potential.
Ryan Berckmans provided perspective on Solana's ability to transition into a global blockchain network, while Ethereum is already well-defined in this role. In a recent post on He pointed out that there are some issues. L2 solution.
These events have made Ethereum's “backbone” approach the dominant model for layer 1 protocols in supporting global financial applications. Since the company's transition four years ago, Ethereum has become the base layer for L2 solutions and dApps.
limited range of solana
It leverages its powerful architecture to serve as the backbone of a growing blockchain environment. He said that while Solana has worked very well in certain areas such as DeFi and meme tokens, it does not have the versatility of Ethereum and cannot be considered a universal solution.
Solana recognizes the L2s model as a unique scaling strategy, which Bergmans says has become the norm among large enterprises and governments looking to use blockchain. Initially, the project focused on “monolithic” structures. While SOL's fast and low transaction fees have been the chain's main features, second-tier solutions have become increasingly popular, hence the term integration.
Challenges in Solana’s growth
Despite Solana's efforts to adapt, Bergmans argued that five key constraints limit its potential to replicate Ethereum's role:
1. Lack of customer diversity: Ethereum has four different client versions that help strengthen the network and minimize potential risks. Nevertheless, SOL only has one client, making the network more vulnerable to potential outages and cyber threats.
2. High bandwidth requirements: Solana currently recommends 10 Gbps uploads, but decentralization is hampered by the network's heavy reliance on large enterprise data centers and restrictions in many regions.
3. Risk of outage:Compared to ETH, Solana has a history of failures and appears weak as a global financial network.
4. centralized ownership: Of the initial supply of SOL, insiders own 98% of the network, which may seem less decentralized compared to Ethereum. Despite being more concentrated in the hands of the masses.
5. Scaling/focus shift: Solana's L1 execution specialization does not correspond to the trend of zk-rollup and other L2 solutions currently observed in the industry, making Ethereum a better choice for scalable dApps.
While Solana may remain relevant and survive in some niche markets, it is still a long way from challenging Ethereum as the essential infrastructure for decentralized finance. L2 adoption is accelerating, and Ethereum is virtually unrivaled in terms of the level of decentralization it offers and the trust that underpins it for the global blockchain community.
