Let's start with an example.

Bitzamp - Understanding Ardor (ARDR)

Here we have a great article from last week, one that does a very decent job explaining Ardor. It introduces Ardor and its child chains as a solution to the infamous "blockchain bloat problem," talks about the many features of the Ardor platform and the scalability and touches on the basics of how the ARDR token works. It even knows about the ARDR snapshots of the Nxt blockchain.

The author wrote:

Conclusion Ardor is a full suite of programs and fully capable of competing with the Microsoft Azure platform. By remaining independent, the company maintains control over network governance.

The conclusion that Ardor is "fully capable of competing with the Microsoft Azure platform" is mindblowing - hey, somebody actually realized it - BUT... nevertheless kinda misleading. Microsoft does not have their own blockchain solution, rather they have repurposed an open-source one and threw it on top of Azure. Jelurida is a name in blockchain innovation, Microsoft is merely riding the blockchain coattails.

Redefining Blockchain as a Service — Beyond Buzzwords

This piece picks up the ball where Bitzamp dropped it. Let's compare Jelurida's BaaS offer on Ardor to Microsoft Azure again, shall we, no wait, let's compare it to say, ANY other currently existing BaaS (Blockchain as a Service) platform out there. Oh, thanks @veronica and @almonte, you did already - and even encountered what might be the main obstacle in doing so:

Today, the “Blockchain as a Service (BaaS)” term is being used interchangeably by various organizations to refer to entirely different offerings. This has led to an urgent need to define subcategories within the sector. This article proposes a new BaaS categorization in order to establish standard, common terminology.

How to compare Ardor to other BaaS models? As long as the BaaS term is un(der)defined, you simply can't, not without repetitive walls of text. Veronika Torras and Alberto Fernandez (both part of the Jelurida team, BTW) propose to divide the BaaS definition into at least 2 sub-categories. After identifying the 3 key elements in a BaaS offering as

1. Storage — the blockchain stores data

2. Software — the blockchain includes permissioned, business-ready features

3. Decentralized network

they are able to coin the following two sub-categories: the Cloud BaaS, and the Full BaaS.

With these, we are now able to compare existing BaaS offerings. Let's return to the Bitzamp article:

Because the Ardor main chain already has the infrastructure for security and decentralization, the child chains are quickly developed to handle custom use cases. Because they are still on the same platform they can use the security, speed, and decentralization of the main chain.

Yes! Exactly, there it is! Now let's compare Ardor to Microsoft Azure again, shall we, no wait, why not compare it to say, ANY other currently existing BaaS platform out here. Oh, thanks @veronica and @almonte for already having done so:

In this first category, Cloud BaaS, we find companies offering storage and software (...); the responsibility for hosting a decentralized network of nodes remains with your business or consortium.

This is:

Amazon Web Services (AWS) Templates

Microsoft Azure

IBM Bluemix

Oracle Autonomous Blockchain Cloud Service

The second category, called Full BaaS, offers not only storage and applications, but also decentralization, offering end-to-end blockchain as a service. In the Full BaaS model, businesses can outsource all three components of the blockchain development process — saving valuable time and resources.

In the Full BaaS category, we have the Ardor multi-chain platform.

Thought leadership - and practice

Some Reddit user was fast to proclaim that the Medium piece is just an advertisement for Jelurida. I don't see his point. I don't care who brings up the subject, clear definitions and clarity are needed for blockchain adoption to move forward in the best way. What I do see though, is why IBM, AWS, Microsoft, and others, that declare themselves leaders in the BaaS space, haven't brought up the issue. If a first mover company doesn't promote its clear advantages over the competition, who will? Probably not those being disrupted. It's not like legacy banks and states are busy promoting Bitcoin, still, it can't really be ignored. Neither can Ardor's Full BaaS solution.

It's new grounds. Most don't care. Some afraid to get left behind. Businesses afraid to get disrupted. Whitepapers all over the place, blockchain this and that if you try to find good information. And crypto media ruled by their own interests, CoinDesk. It's up to the businesses to decide, whether they want Cloud BaaS or a Full BaaS, to run their own nodes or get instant security from a truly decentralized network - if they even need a blockchain. Or a child chain.

Ignis is free for everyone and supports all Ardor's features. Ardor's parent-child chain architecture allows for a company to set up its own permissioned blockchain on a Proof of Stake platform, PoS battle-proven in production since 2013, and with today's most advanced programmable features to fit the company's needs, their own blockchain token, all instantly secured by a network of decentralized nodes. But it's just words, it's just advertisement, right? That, or real information.

To really know, you should test it. DYOR. You can start with the "Blockchain Ardor - Medium Series" or this free Bootcamp.