Decentralized storage has long been dominated by Filecoin(FIL) and Arweave(AR), the two "veteran players." But recent changes are quite interesting— as Layer1 ecosystems are reshaped and technological demands continue to evolve, these established protocols are beginning to reveal performance shortcomings. Today, let's look at why Walrus might be seriously underestimated, using data, technical architecture, and market size.

**The Three Generations of Changes in the Storage Sector**

Web3 experiences new infrastructure leaders emerging with each bull market, and the storage sector is no exception.

**1.0 Stage(Filecoin Era)**
Solves the "from nothing to something" problem. Uses proof of storage(PoRep) to carve out massive storage space. The cost? Retrieval is painfully slow, mainly used for cold storage—stuff that just gathers dust once stored.

**2.0 Stage(Arweave Era)**
Focus shifts to "permanence." One-time payment, data permanently on-chain. Ideal for NFT metadata, historical archives, and similar. But here’s the problem—high-frequency update data like gaming and social content have rigid cost models and lack flexibility.

**3.0 Stage(Walrus Emerges)**
The talk is about breakthroughs in "availability and performance." This project is tailored for high-throughput public chains(like Sui), specifically designed to handle "hot data" and "warm data." This is true differentiation.

**Core Metrics Competition Among the Three Major Projects**

In terms of efficiency, cost, and use cases, the differences are actually quite clear...