Skip to main content

Polkadot

Let's start with a quick overview of Polkadot, and then we will continue with comparing Polkadot to Chromia and also discuss the benefits and challenges with the two solutions.

Polkadot​

Tech and Architecture

  • Consists of a Relay Chain (the main chain), Parachains (parallel blockchains), and Bridges (connections to other blockchains like Ethereum).
  • Uses a Nominated Proof-of-Stake (NPoS) consensus mechanism. In NPoS, validators are selected by the community to secure the network. Validators validate transactions and propose new blocks to the Relay Chain.
  • Features like Cross-chain Message Passing (XCMP) for communication between chains. XCMP allows parachains to send messages to each other and the Relay Chain. This enables applications to span multiple blockchains and leverage the strengths of each one.

Scalability

  • Polkadot achieves scalability through parachains, which allow for parallel transaction processing, and the Relay Chain, which coordinates consensus and ensures security.
  • By distributing transactions across multiple parachains, Polkadot can handle a much higher volume of transactions than a single-chain blockchain.

Development tools

  • Polkadot provides the Substrate framework for building blockchains. Substrate is a modular framework that allows developers to select or modify components as needed.

  • For Substrate development you can use Rust, but Polkadot supports other programming languages, such as Golang, C++, and Solidity through WebAssembly (Wasm).

Fee structure

  • Polkadot uses a dynamic fee model, calculating fees based on transaction complexity and network congestion.

Comparison​

Development​

Polkadot

  • Polkadot uses Rust as its primary programming language for smart contract development. But it supports other languages like Golang, C++, and Solidity through WebAssembly (Wasm)

    WebAssembly enables developers to use their preferred language within the Polkadot ecosystem.

  • Substrate framework: This is a framework that breaks down a blockchain's development process by providing complete building blocks of functionality, removing the need for re-engineering complex mechanisms that are usually involved when developing a blockchain.

Chromia

  • Chromia uses Rell, a relational blockchain programming language. Rell can be a more user-friendly language than Go or Rust, making it easier for developers to build dapps on Chromia.
  • Development on Chromia using Rell is very similar to Web2 development. For more insights on this, check out our guide here.
  • Chromia provides tools and libraries to simplify authentication, transaction signing, and asset management, and new features are added to support rapid dapp development.
  • Chromia's development environment has support for testing using its own test framework and simple deployment using developer-friendly tools.

Scalability​

Polkadot

  • Polkadot's approach to scalability works around a Relay Chain and the use of Parachains. The Relay Chain, serving as the core of the network, focuses on security and consensus while offloading transaction processing to the Parachains. These Parachains are independent blockchains that operate in parallel within Polkadot, each optimized for specific functions such as high-speed transactions or decentralized storage.

    This architecture enables concurrent transaction processing, increasing the network’s capacity compared to traditional blockchains that process transactions sequentially.

    However, creating a parachain requires significant technical expertise and resources.

Chromia

  • Chromia's approach is that every dapp on Chromia operates on a unique subchain. Each subchain can handle hundreds of transactions every second. If a dapp witnesses growth, it can with ease be expanded by adding more chains. This structure guarantees sustained high throughput and a predictable way of scaling your dapp, much like in a traditional cloud environment.

    Since every subchain is isolated from other subchains, this means that they can process transactions in parallel, in essence scaling horizontally and only your app architecture sets the limit for scalability.

    Chromias sidechain architecture is built into the platform, making it a low effort for developers to utilize this approach of side chains.

Operational Costs & Fees​

Polkadot

  • Deploying and executing smart contracts on Polkadot is associated with transaction fees. These fees cover both the deployment and ongoing transactions needed for the dapp when the contracts are executed by the end-users. This works like traditional gas fees, although Polkadot has a weight-based fee model with the goal of achieving predictable fees.

    Transaction fees compensate validators and nominators for maintaining network security and operations.

  • For dapps needing a dedicated blockchain, a parachain slot is necessary. This slot is acquired through periodic auctions, and there is a cost for both acquisition and maintenance.

Chromia

  • Chromia changes the game by allowing developers to host their decentralized app (dapp) in a container for a fixed, predictable fee. This transparency means developers know how much their operational costs are each month, and they can create their own end-user fee structures to cover these operational expenses.

    So, instead of being charged gas fees for every action, there's a single, more manageable cost to work with.

  • As a Chromia dapp grows in usage, the developer of the dapp can increase the resources of their container. Very similar to how you manage resources in a Cloud environment.

Revenue models​

Polkadot

  • Users can participate in the network security by staking their tokens. Staking involves locking up DOT tokens for a specified period earning rewards in the form of newly minted DOT tokens. This staking mechanism incentivizes DOT holders to participate actively in network maintenance and security, ensuring stability and resilience.

  • Like other blockchain networks, Polkadot generates transaction fees when users execute transactions on the network. The transaction fee structure is designed to be dynamic and responsive to network conditions, adjusting based on congestion and transaction complexity

Chromia

  • Since the operational costs of the dapp are fixed and predictable, the dapp developer can choose which fee model they want to use for their end-users. With Chromia, you are not locked in by transactions and gas fees.

  • For your dapp, you can have a monthly subscription fee, charge for single features, or, if you want, per transaction. This opens up a more user-friendly experience since you can even let the user start for free and then open up for revenues later when the user has found the value of your dapp. This is a common practice in traditional web applications and should be no different for Web3.

Conclusion and comparison summary to Chromia​

In the web3 space, Polkadot and Chromia are two notable platforms, each with its own features. Let's summarize and discuss the benefits and challenges.

Architecture​

Polkadot features a good design with its Relay Chain and Parachains. This architecture, while robust, requires a deep understanding of its complex layers demanding considerable technical expertise from its developers.

In contrast, Chromia stands out for its simplicity and accessibility. Chromia uses Rell, a relational blockchain programming language, deliberately similar to modern programming languages like JavaScript and Kotlin. This makes it a comfortable platform for developers, especially those transitioning from traditional web development.

This allows for a broader range of developers to create dapps without the steep learning curve associated with more complex languages like Rust, used in Polkadot.

Scalability Considerations​

While Polkadot's scalability is achieved through its Relay Chain and Parachains, enabling parallel transaction processing and high throughput, this again requires a deep technical knowledge and development effort.

Chromia, on the other hand, offers a similar straightforward scalability solution. Each dapp operates on its own subchain, capable of handling high transaction volumes. Scalability can be easily managed through resource adjustments, which is very close to cloud services. Making the development and resource management effort more straightforward.

Operational costs & fees​

Polkadot's dynamic fee model, though innovative, might pose unpredictability in costs for developers. Additionally, the requirement of a parachain slot for dedicated blockchain applications adds another layer of expense.

Chromia, however offers a fixed, predictable fee for hosting dapps. This model not only simplifies budgeting for developers but also allows them to craft unique fee structures for end-users, enhancing the user experience.

Revenue models​

Polkadot's revenue generation relies on traditional methods like staking and transaction fees. These mechanisms, while proven, may not offer the flexibility modern dapp developers seek.

Chromia allows developers to choose their revenue models, from subscriptions to feature-based charges or even transaction fees. This flexibility opens up creative revenue strategies that are more aligned with today's web apps.

Final words​

In summary, while Polkadot presents a powerful blockchain solution, Chromia stands out with its user-friendly approach, straightforward scalability, and innovative cost and revenue models. These features make Chromia an appealing choice, especially for those seeking a seamless transition from web2 into the web3 domain.