As a Filecoin user since 2021, I thought I knew decentralized storage. I’d dealt with node selection, complex pricing, and public metadata. Then I tried @Walrus 🦭/acc . The differences weren't just technical—they were philosophical, practical, and sometimes surprising.
1. Privacy: Built-In vs. Bolted-On
Filecoin’s approach: store data redundantly across miners, but content IDs (CIDs) and retrieval records are public. If you know a CID, you can see who stored it, when, and often trace its origins.
Walrus’s approach: encryption happens before storage. Files are split into encrypted shards. The blockchain records permissions—not content. My storage activities aren’t a public ledger.
Surprise: I didn’t realize how much metadata I was exposing until I used a system that didn’t expose any.
2. User Experience: Developer-First vs. User-First
Filecoin feels built for developers and miners. The interface is technical. Pricing requires understanding piB, deals, and sector sealing. It’s powerful but complex.
Walrus feels built for end-users. The dashboard resembles consumer cloud storage. Upload, share, organize—familiar actions with unfamiliar (in a good way) privacy.
Surprise: I stored files on Walrus in 3 minutes. My first Filecoin storage deal took 3 days to set up.
3. Token Utility: Speculative vs. Integrated
$FIL is primarily for paying storage miners and as collateral. Its utility is narrow within the storage process itself.
$WAL serves multiple roles: storage payments, staking for network security, governance voting, and access control. I pay for storage with $WAL, stake $WAL to earn yield, and vote with $WAL on protocol upgrades.
Surprise: Using $WAL feels like participating in an ecosystem. Using $FIL feels like paying for a service.
4. Speed & Accessibility: Hours vs. Minutes
Filecoin retrieval can be slow. Miners must be online, deals must be active. I’ve waited hours for large files.
Walrus retrieval is near-instant. Built on @SuiNetwork, the underlying blockchain’s speed translates to faster file access. No deal-making—just permission-based retrieval.
Surprise: The first time I downloaded a 1GB file from Walrus in under a minute, I genuinely thought something was wrong. Then I realized: this is how decentralized storage should work.
5. Cost Structure: Predictable vs. Auction-Based
Filecoin uses a storage market auction system. Prices fluctuate based on miner supply and demand. Good for miners, unpredictable for users.
Walrus has transparent, stable pricing. I know exactly what 100GB will cost me monthly in $WAL. No bidding, no deal negotiations.
Surprise: My monthly Walrus bill is 30% lower than my comparable Filecoin storage, and I don’t need to monitor storage markets.
6. Enterprise Orientation: Optional vs. Fundamental
Filecoin added privacy features later (through encryption partners). Privacy is an option.
Walrus was built with privacy as the foundation. Every file is private-by-default. This isn’t a feature—it’s the product.
Surprise: I finally understood why enterprises might choose Walrus over Filecoin for sensitive data. It’s not about which is more decentralized—it’s about which is more private.
7. Mobile Experience: Nonexistent vs. Functional
Filecoin has no native mobile experience. Everything happens through wallets or web interfaces not optimized for phones.
Walrus’s web interface is mobile-responsive. I can access, share, and manage files from my phone seamlessly.
Surprise: I actually used Walrus from my phone before my desktop. That never happened with Filecoin.
8. Community & Governance: Miner-Led vs. User-Led
Filecoin governance heavily involves miners (understandably—they secure the network). User voices can be overshadowed by miner economics.
Walrus governance feels more balanced between stakers, users, and developers. Recent proposals included direct user experience improvements, not just miner economics.
Surprise: My governance vote in Walrus actually felt impactful. My Filecoin votes felt like formalities.
9. The Mental Model: Storage Network vs. Privacy Platform
After years with Filecoin, I thought: “This is a decentralized storage network.”
After weeks with Walrus, I think: “This is a privacy platform that happens to use decentralized storage.”
The difference is subtle but profound. One is infrastructure. The other is a solution.
10. The Learning Curve
Filecoin: I needed to understand IPFS, CIDs, storage markets, miners, sealing, retrieval.
Walrus: I needed to understand “upload, encrypt, share.”
My Current Approach:
- Filecoin: Public datasets, open-source project files, non-sensitive archives
- Walrus: Personal documents, business files, anything requiring true privacy
- Traditional cloud: Almost nothing anymore
Conclusion: Different Tools for Different Needs
I’m not abandoning Filecoin. It’s incredible for what it does—decentralized storage at massive scale. But I was surprised to discover that @walrusprotocol isn’t a competitor in the traditional sense. It’s solving a different problem: private, accessible, user-friendly decentralized storage.
The biggest surprise? I didn’t know I needed what Walrus offers until I tried it. Now I can’t imagine going back to a world where my storage provider knows more about my files than I do.
