Quote from: odolvlobo on October 19, 2013, 06:55:51 PM

Quote from: Lohoris on October 19, 2013, 06:50:40 PM

Quote from: odolvlobo on October 19, 2013, 06:48:16 PM

Quote from: Lohoris on October 19, 2013, 01:31:54 PM

Quote from: kokjo on October 18, 2013, 09:46:46 AM

because litecoin brings nothing significant to the table that bitcoin does not have.

+1

That is a poor argument. The same could be said about Hertz vs. Avis, or AMD vs. Intel, or Coke vs. Pepsi.
What Litecoin brings to the table is that it is a viable alternative. That doesn't count for much (as shown by the disparity in values), but it does count for something.
Litecoin is a couple years behind bitcoin in adoption, and it will be a tough road to mass adoption because it will always be overshadowed by bitcoin. I don't know if it will succeed or not, but I think it will.

Completely wrong.
If you buy an AMD chip you can still use the same programs as people who use an Intel chip.
If you buy litecoins you have a different currency, incompatible with bitcoin.

Wrong? You just proved my point.

I am free to buy an AMD chip because this will not prevent me from doing stuff I would do with an Intel chip, since they are compatible. They are compatible alternatives. If I need an Intel chip, I can buy an AMD chip instea and be fine.
If I need bitcoins, I buy bitcoins. If I need bitcoins, buying litecoins won't help me, since they are incompatible with bitcoins.
Get it now?