Add Enkrypt, MEW Portfolio and MEW Mobile wallets

[Abyscuit]

Add wallets: Enkrypt, MEW Portfolio and MEW Mobile Add wallet dev: MyEtherWallet Add contributor: Abyscuit

[polymutex]

Thanks for filling this in!

I think we should first clarify the wallet grouping at a high level, before going into each of the wallet feature data. The beta branch's wallet data type system is meant to be able to represent multi-platform wallets as a single wallet. For example, Rabby has a mobile, desktop, and browser extension, but all of them are grouped under the same rabby.ts software wallet entry. Many of the feature data have type VariantFeature<T>, which allows them to be set to either null (unknown), or T, or { desktop?: T, mobile?: T, browser?: T }. This way, cross-platform wallets where the feature data is all the same (or where they share code across all platforms) can be directly T, whereas features where the implementation differ between platforms can use the { desktop?: T, mobile?: T, browser?: T } format.

That said, I am not sure the product suite here should be classified either as 3 independent wallets, or as one single wallet. It seems that https://www.myetherwallet.com/ and https://www.enkrypt.com/ and https://www.mewwallet.com/ all link to each other, are owned by the same entity, and, in the case of MEW Portfolio and MEW Wallet, share part of their name and the same branding/icon, which seems like an argument to group them together.

However, looking at their functionality, I'm not convinced that MEW Portfolio would really be classified as a software wallet by Walletbeat. It looks more like a portfolio viewer (and its name suggests this), i.e. it is a read-only application, with optional transaction signing features if you connect an external browser extension or hardware wallet to it. That said, it does have a private key/seed phrase import option (marked as "not recommended"), so I guess it can be used as a wallet too...? and it does have "wallet" in its domain name. And the wallet access page promotes the use of the Enkrypt browser extension and the MEW wallet app as "Official", which is an argument for grouping them. This is difficult to classify :) Perhaps there's case to be made that MEW Portfolio should be seen as a part of the Enkrypt browser extension, and also as part of the MEW wallet app, rather than its own wallet?

The case for keeping Encrypt and MEW Wallet separate from each other is probably stronger; they don't seem to be as connected to each other as they are to MEW Portfolio. So not sure whether you'd prefer to keep them separate or not.

I realize this is a long and rather unclear comment... Mostly a stream of consciousness about classification for these wallets.

Could you describe the branding and the strategy for these 3 products? Do you plan to make them converge into a more unified interface, or do you see them as three separate products that Enkrypt publishes independently? Do they share some of their codebase?

[Abyscuit]

Thanks for filling this in!

I think we should first clarify the wallet grouping at a high level, before going into each of the wallet feature data. The beta branch's wallet data type system is meant to be able to represent multi-platform wallets as a single wallet. For example, Rabby has a mobile, desktop, and browser extension, but all of them are grouped under the same rabby.ts software wallet entry. Many of the feature data have type VariantFeature<T>, which allows them to be set to either null (unknown), or T, or { desktop?: T, mobile?: T, browser?: T }. This way, cross-platform wallets where the feature data is all the same (or where they share code across all platforms) can be directly T, whereas features where the implementation differ between platforms can use the { desktop?: T, mobile?: T, browser?: T } format.

That said, I am not sure the product suite here should be classified either as 3 independent wallets, or as one single wallet. It seems that https://www.myetherwallet.com/ and https://www.enkrypt.com/ and https://www.mewwallet.com/ all link to each other, are owned by the same entity, and, in the case of MEW Portfolio and MEW Wallet, share part of their name and the same branding/icon, which seems like an argument to group them together.

However, looking at their functionality, I'm not convinced that MEW Portfolio would really be classified as a software wallet by Walletbeat. It looks more like a portfolio viewer (and its name suggests this), i.e. it is a read-only application, with optional transaction signing features if you connect an external browser extension or hardware wallet to it. That said, it does have a private key/seed phrase import option (marked as "not recommended"), so I guess it can be used as a wallet too...? and it does have "wallet" in its domain name. And the wallet access page promotes the use of the Enkrypt browser extension and the MEW wallet app as "Official", which is an argument for grouping them. This is difficult to classify :) Perhaps there's case to be made that MEW Portfolio should be seen as a part of the Enkrypt browser extension, and also as part of the MEW wallet app, rather than its own wallet?

The case for keeping Encrypt and MEW Wallet separate from each other is probably stronger; they don't seem to be as connected to each other as they are to MEW Portfolio. So not sure whether you'd prefer to keep them separate or not.

I realize this is a long and rather unclear comment... Mostly a stream of consciousness about classification for these wallets.

Could you describe the branding and the strategy for these 3 products? Do you plan to make them converge into a more unified interface, or do you see them as three separate products that Enkrypt publishes independently? Do they share some of their codebase?

@polymutex While MyEtherWallet is the company, each of the product lines is inherently unique serving different user bases and needs.