Author: YBB Capital Researcher Zeke

Introduction

Recently, the market has become increasingly cold, and many OGs in the industry have begun to question the significance of the sector. Here are my personal thoughts: I have always felt that many great visions of the past were "falsified" because these visions were logically inconsistent from the very beginning. Dapps outside of financial applications always try to cover up the inadequacies of their products by emphasizing the value of decentralization. But the fact is, they want me to distrust Google, Twitter, and YouTube, and instead believe that their multi-signature wallets and standalone servers are secure enough. Many visions are not falsified; they have simply never been truly validated. I still believe that most visions, even if not grand, have their significance; they may just need sufficient underlying support. Ultimately, in terms of decentralization and a user experience comparable to Web2, at least one of these can be provided. Just like in the past, TON and Solana were similarly underestimated, but now they are gradually catching up with the big brother in various aspects. Public chains that carry applications need innovation, which will drive industry progress in every cycle. Therefore, today we will explore a type of public chain that has long been overlooked: the Move ecosystem.

I. Move

The Move programming language was originally born from Meta's abandoned project Diem (initially called Libra), which aimed to create a more stable and regulated stablecoin as the foundation of its metaverse vision. However, contrary to expectations, the project faced strong opposition and ongoing pressure from global regulators. Regulators were concerned that Diem's scale and Facebook's massive user base could pose threats to financial stability, monetary policy, and data privacy. The pressure led by the Biden administration ultimately forced Meta to abandon the Diem project.

Fortunately, the core of Diem has not been abandoned; different factions that split from the original team are still committed to exploring and developing Move, which has now evolved into the well-known Move twins: Sui and Aptos. In addition, there are several public chain projects still in their infancy, such as Linera (a Rust public chain inspired by Move) and the recently heavily promoted Movement.

So why does the aftermath of a halved project have such a significant impact? Move serves as a response from leading Web2 companies to blockchain programming languages, and its foundation speaks for itself. It has also reflected on many performance and security issues surrounding existing blockchain programming languages (especially Solidity) in its design. Its design goal is to tailor a type system for asset management and access control. I summarize it in three simple points:

• Security: The primary premise of Move's language design is security. It uses static type checking and resource management to prevent common security vulnerabilities, such as overflow errors and reentrancy attacks. Compared to other language virtual machines, Move supports various security features, as shown in the comparison from Nansen below.

• Composability: It supports modularity and composability, allowing developers to easily create and combine different smart contracts to build more complex applications.

• Performance: The Move language's virtual machine is optimized (supporting parallelism, memory management, and compiler optimization) to efficiently execute smart contracts, thereby improving transaction speed and throughput.

In a market flooded with modular EVM public chains, Move is indeed a brave attempt. The three points I mentioned above may also be seen in the introductions of many public chain projects, but I recommend experiencing them firsthand to visualize these words.

II. Sui

2.1 Architecture

As one of the Move twins, Sui faced criticism in its early launch due to airdrop issues and token release methods. However, setting these issues aside and focusing on the project itself, Sui is at least excellent in terms of performance and experience, particularly excelling in gaming, thanks to its architecture designed for mainstream adoption. Here, I will briefly describe Sui's architectural innovations:

1. Object Storage Model: This component is the core of Sui's improvements to Move. The object storage model stores data as independent objects, each with a unique identifier. Unlike traditional database systems, the object storage model does not have a fixed data structure and can store various types of data, such as text, images, videos, and audio. This model allows for parallel execution and horizontal scaling (adding nodes to expand storage capacity), and Sui's design revolves around this model.

2. Causal Ordering: Ensures that the execution order of transactions adheres to causal relationships, avoiding data conflicts and inconsistencies. This allows Sui to handle a large number of concurrent transactions while maintaining data consistency.

3. Narwhal and Bullshark Consensus Engines: Sui uses Narwhal and Bullshark as its consensus engines. Narwhal is responsible for transaction ordering and validation, working by maintaining a local transaction pool, sorting transactions based on their causal relationships, and broadcasting them to ensure all nodes have the same and valid transaction order. Bullshark votes on the transaction list received from Narwhal and uses Byzantine fault tolerance consensus to ensure all nodes agree on the transaction list.

4. Sui Move: Sui has expanded on the Move language, adding new features such as support for NFTs, asset management, and data storage.

5. Sui Framework: Sui provides a complete framework to help developers quickly build and deploy applications. This framework includes various tools and libraries, such as the Sui wallet, Sui SDK, and Sui CLI.

Sui's architectural design enables it to handle a large number of concurrent transactions while maintaining high speed, low fees, and security. Additionally, Sui's Move language and Sui framework provide developers with powerful tools to help them build secure, scalable, and user-friendly applications.

2.2 Consensus

The Sui blockchain uses a consensus mechanism called Mysticeti, which is a Byzantine fault-tolerant (BFT) consensus designed to optimize low latency and high throughput.

Mysticeti allows multiple validators to propose blocks in parallel, fully utilizing network bandwidth and providing censorship resistance. Additionally, the protocol requires only three rounds of messages to submit blocks from a DAG (Directed Acyclic Graph), matching the theoretical minimum, similar to pBFT. The submission rules allow for parallel voting and certifying block leaders, further reducing median and tail latency. The submission rules can also tolerate unavailable leaders without significantly increasing submission latency.

Before the Sui mainnet went live, Mysticeti had already been running on the testnet for three months, achieving significant results, including an 80% reduction in latency. Now, the Sui network can process tens of thousands of transactions per second, with end-to-end latency far below one second.

The Sui blockchain also employs a specific type of proof-of-stake consensus called Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS). When complex transactions involving shared objects occur, Sui uses the aforementioned Narwhal & Bullshark consensus engine for transaction ordering. Compared to other BFT consensus mechanism public chains, Sui's advantages and disadvantages can be summarized in six points:

Advantages:

• Low latency and high throughput: The Mysticeti protocol significantly reduces consensus latency and increases network throughput through parallel block proposals and optimized messaging processes. This allows the Sui blockchain to handle tens of thousands of transactions per second, with end-to-end latency far below one second;

• Censorship resistance: The Mysticeti protocol allows multiple validators to propose blocks in parallel, enhancing the network's resistance to censorship;

• Tolerance for unavailable leaders: The submission rules allow for tolerance of unavailable leaders (when a leader node fails, the system automatically elects a new leader to take over its duties) without significantly increasing submission latency.

Disadvantages:

• Complexity: The design of the Mysticeti protocol is relatively complex, requiring a deeper technical understanding to fully grasp its operational mechanisms;

• Security: Although the Mysticeti protocol has performed excellently on the testnet, its security still needs further validation in real-world applications;

• Scalability: The scalability of the Mysticeti protocol still needs further observation to ensure it can adapt to the future growth of network scale and transaction volume.

2.3 Abstract Accounts

Sui's abstract account model (Account Abstraction) is a mechanism that allows users to manage their accounts and transactions in a simpler and more secure way. It achieves a higher level of account management and transaction processing by abstracting account and transaction logic from the underlying blockchain protocol.

In Sui's abstract account model, accounts are no longer simple public key-private key pairs but objects with richer attributes and behaviors. Each account has a unique identifier called an account ID, which is associated with the account's public key and private key pair.

The key components of Sui's abstract account model include:

1. Account Object: The account object is the basic unit of accounts in Sui. Each account object has a unique account ID and contains the account's attributes and behaviors;

2. Account Data: Account data is the core component of the account object. It contains basic information about the account, such as account ID, public key, and private key pair;

3. Transaction Context: The transaction context is the basic unit of transactions in Sui. It contains relevant information about the transaction, such as transaction ID, account ID, and transaction data;

4. Account Logic: Account logic is the collection of behaviors and rules for accounts in Sui. It defines how accounts handle transactions and manage their states.

Sui's abstract account model processes transactions through the following steps:

1. Transaction Creation: The user creates a transaction and sends it to the Sui network;

2. Transaction Validation: The Sui network validates the transaction's validity and integrity;

3. Account Lookup: The Sui network looks up the corresponding account object based on the account ID in the transaction;

4. Account Logic Execution: The Sui network executes the account logic to process the transaction and update the account state;

5. Transaction Confirmation: The Sui network confirms the transaction result and writes it to the blockchain.

In simple terms, Sui's abstract account model is an innovative mechanism that simplifies account management and transaction processing, making applications feel more like applications.

2.4 Gaming

For a public chain to stand out, it must first accumulate and settle. The reason I referred to Move as a brave attempt earlier is due to two reasons: first, in an era where the concept of modularity is generalized, the native Move ecosystem (i.e., the Move twins) represents one of the last attempts at Layer 1, essentially going against the trend. However, the recent rise of multiple heterogeneous chains may prove that modularity is not the only answer. Second, the act of recreating a public chain and adopting a new programming language can be likened to attempting to recreate a system to challenge iOS and Android in the current mobile market; the future path will undoubtedly be fraught with challenges. Whether the Move ecosystem can shine like Solana in the coming years will be crucially determined by its chosen development direction. Sui's answer to this question is gaming.

Gaming is one of the important entry points for Web3, but the vast majority of public chains do not provide good support for gaming. This is because blockchain was fundamentally designed around finance from its inception, and due to the performance limitations of decentralized structures, it is inherently unsuitable for gaming. However, Sui is different; its model is suitable for both DeFi applications and non-financial applications and games. As mentioned earlier, in Sui, everything is an object. Games or applications have complex assets with hierarchical relationships; in Sui, objects can own other objects (assets can own assets). Suppose you are playing a game with a hero character, and that hero has an inventory that contains other digital assets belonging to that character. Sui can model these data hierarchies accurately in ways that other blockchains cannot. Therefore, it gives developers the opportunity to express the applications they want to build without having to address the fundamental limitations of the chain.

In addition, Sui is actively collaborating with traditional Web2 giants. Since last year, it has formed partnerships with three of the four major South Korean gaming giants (Netmarble, NHN, and NCSoft). This year, it is collaborating with TikTok to develop blockchain games and SocialFi projects, bringing traditional giants into Web2.

III. Aptos

Aptos, as another Layer 1 blockchain based on the Move language, is also dedicated to building high-performance, scalable Web3 infrastructure. Its architectural design shares many similarities with Sui but also exhibits some unique characteristics.

3.1 Architecture

1. Modular Design: Aptos adopts a modular architecture, allowing developers to independently develop and upgrade different modules, thereby improving development speed and flexibility;

2. Parallel Execution Engine (Block-STM): Unlike other blockchains that require prior declaration of data dependencies, Aptos's parallel execution engine can process transactions in parallel without prior knowledge of data locations, thereby improving throughput and reducing latency;

3. Pipelined Transaction Processing: Aptos divides transaction processing into multiple stages, such as propagation, metadata sorting, and batch storage, and executes these stages in parallel through a pipelined approach to maximize throughput and reduce latency;

4. Move Programming Language: Aptos uses the Move programming language, and compared to the innovations introduced by Sui, Aptos focuses more on refining it. For example, it standardizes the language, introduces more powerful function support, and customizability;

5. Flexible State Synchronization: Allows nodes to choose different state synchronization strategies, such as synchronizing the complete history or only the latest state, thereby enhancing node flexibility;

6. AptosBFT Consensus Mechanism: AptosBFT is the Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus mechanism used by Aptos, which improves throughput and reduces latency by optimizing communication and synchronization between validators. Compared to Sui, it can only be considered an improved version of DiemBFT, making some enhancements in efficiency and crash recovery, so I will only briefly explain it here.

Aptos's architectural design enables it to handle a large number of concurrent transactions while maintaining high speed, low fees, and security. Additionally, Aptos's Move language and Aptos framework provide developers with powerful tools to help them build secure, scalable, and user-friendly applications.

3.2 Block-STM

Here, we will elaborate on Aptos's core innovation, the parallel execution engine Block-STM:

Core Principles of Block-STM:

1. Preset Sequential Execution: Block-STM relies on the preset order of transactions in a block, and all transactions must be executed in this order to ensure the consistency of the final state;

2. Optimistic Concurrency Control: Block-STM optimistically executes transactions in parallel, assuming that conflicts will not occur. Optimistic concurrency control is based on the assumption that "conflicts are rare," allowing transactions to access and modify data without locking. It believes that the probability of multiple transactions conflicting simultaneously is low, so they can be modified first and checked for conflicts before the final submission;

3. Multi-Version Data Structure: To support optimistic concurrency control, Block-STM uses a multi-version data structure to store data. Each write operation creates a new data version, while read operations access the corresponding version of the data;

4. Validation and Retry: After executing a transaction, Block-STM validates whether the read data version is still valid. If validation fails, indicating a conflict, the transaction is marked as invalid and re-executed;

5. Cooperative Scheduling: Block-STM uses a cooperative scheduler to coordinate the execution and validation tasks of various threads to maximize parallelism.

Workflow of Block-STM:

1. Transaction Grouping: Group transactions in the block, assigning them to different threads for parallel execution;

2. Optimistic Execution: Each thread optimistically executes the transactions assigned to it and records the read-write set of each transaction;

3. Validation: When a thread completes the execution of a transaction, it validates whether the data versions in its read set are still valid;

4. Retry: If validation fails, indicating a conflict, the transaction is marked as invalid and re-executed;

5. Submission: Once all transactions pass validation, the results are written to the blockchain state, completing the transaction submission.

Advantages of Block-STM:

• High Throughput: Through optimistic concurrency control and cooperative scheduling, Block-STM can fully utilize the performance of multi-core processors, achieving high throughput;

• Low Latency: Since transactions can be executed in parallel, Block-STM can significantly reduce transaction confirmation times;

• Security: The preset sequential execution and validation mechanisms of Block-STM ensure the consistency and security of the final state.

In simple terms, Block-STM is an efficient parallel transaction execution engine that combines optimistic concurrency control, multi-version data structures, and cooperative scheduling techniques to maximize blockchain throughput while ensuring safety and correctness.

3.3 Abstract Accounts

Unlike Sui's abstract accounts, which are more direct, Aptos's support for abstraction is somewhat limited and lacks specific predefined standards. Its abstract account capabilities are mainly reflected in the following aspects:

1. Modular Account Management: Use Move modules to define and manage accounts, allowing developers to create custom modules to implement different account types and functionalities.

2. Flexible Key Management: Allows users to use different keys for different operations on the account, such as using one key for transaction signing and another key for account management.

3. Programmable Transaction Validation: Developers can define custom transaction validation logic in Move modules, such as multi-signature and limits, to meet different application scenarios.

3.4 Collaboration with Microsoft

Compared to Sui's focus on gaming development, Aptos does not have a specific development goal, with its slogan being the most production-ready blockchain. Notably, Aptos is currently collaborating with Microsoft to integrate Microsoft's AI technology into the blockchain. The first collaborative product, Aptos Assistant, has already launched on the official page; this product is a generative AI assistant built on the Aptos network, with more AI products to be announced in the coming months.

IV. Move Ecosystem

Although Sui has performed well recently, the rise of Move still requires some time to settle compared to the EVM ecosystem and heterogeneous chains like Solana and Ton. Currently, the twin stars Sui and Aptos, while shining with celebrity status, have indeed made technical breakthroughs, but the overall scale and activity of the Move ecosystem still lag behind other mature ecosystems. The number of developers, types of applications, and user scale all need time to accumulate. From external collaborations to operations, both exhibit a strong Web2 mindset, lacking some Web3 genes, and various collaborative projects have remained lukewarm within the circle.

However, regarding the potential of the Move ecosystem, there are many aspects worth digging deeper into, and some developers have already noticed the future value of Move. As mentioned in the introduction, there are already projects introducing Move into ETH Layer 2, and the future Move ecosystem will also shine in the ETH Layer 2 ecosystem. What remains to be done is how to promote the Move ecosystem effectively.

References:

A comparison of Aptos and Sui: https://cryptotvplus.com/2022/08/a-comparison-of-aptos-and-sui/

Nansen: Detailed analysis of the technical characteristics and ecological status of the star public chain Aptos: https://foresightnews.pro/article/detail/16825

Aptos Documentation: https://aptos.dev/en/network/blockchain/move

Sui Official Documentation: https://docs.sui.io/

As a newcomer to blockchain, how to understand Sui and its operation: https://medium.com/sui-network-cn/身为区块链新人-如何理解sui及其运行方式-f2aaa5d8848f