Move Language (Aptos and Sui)
Why Move's resource model fundamentally differs from Solidity, how Aptos and Sui evolved from the same Facebook-origin language, and what 'resources' mean for safety guarantees.
What Move Is
Move is a smart-contract language originally developed at Facebook for the Diem (formerly Libra) blockchain. After Diem shut down, Aptos and Sui — both founded by former Diem team members — picked up Move as their primary smart-contract language. Move is notable for its 'resource' model: assets like tokens are first-class language constructs that can't be copied or accidentally deleted, only moved between owners. This eliminates a class of bugs (double-spending, accidental burn) at the language level.
Why Resources Matter
In Solidity, your token balance is just a number in a mapping. The contract has to enforce 'this balance can't decrease without an authorised transfer.' Bugs in that enforcement (Cream Finance, Compound's COMP distribution bug, others) have produced major losses. In Move, a token is a 'resource' — the language type system tracks ownership. You literally can't write code that copies a token or destroys it without using a defined `destroy` operation. Whole exploit categories that exist on Solidity are unrepresentable in Move.
Aptos vs Sui — Same Language, Different Ecosystems
Both Aptos and Sui use Move, but the chains diverge. **Aptos** uses Move closer to its original Diem form (Move 1) with sequential execution. **Sui** uses Move with significant modifications (Sui Move) and parallel execution similar to Solana's Sealevel. The forks are now substantially different — code written for Aptos isn't directly portable to Sui. Both chains have meaningful TVL ($1-3B each at various points) and active developer ecosystems.
- Move originated at Facebook for the Diem project; lives on in Aptos and Sui
- Resource model: assets are first-class types that can't be copied or accidentally destroyed
- Aptos: closer to original Move with sequential execution
- Sui: forked Move with parallel execution and significant modifications
Key Takeaways
- Move's resource model prevents whole exploit categories at the language level
- Aptos and Sui both use Move but have diverged significantly
- Move developer pool is smaller than Solidity but growing
- Trade-off: stronger safety guarantees + harder onboarding for Solidity devs
Related Content
Related Coins
Related Topics
Key Terms
More Topics
Browse all 179 topicsOptimism Bedrock and the Superchain
How OP Mainnet's Bedrock architecture, fault-proof rollout, and Superchain interop strategy reshape Optimism from a single rollup into the dominant modular L2 framework.
Base Architecture
How Coinbase's Base L2 implements OP Stack, how Coinbase's exchange-side integration drives uniquely smooth UX, what the sequencer's centralised reality means today, and the path to a 'stage-2' rollup.
Linea and Polygon zkEVM Compared
How two production zkEVMs — Linea (Consensys) and Polygon zkEVM — compare on EVM-equivalence levels, prover technology, ecosystem strategy, and what each chain's positioning means for users and developers.
Solana Programs and Anchor
How Solana's account model differs from Ethereum's, why Sealevel enables parallel execution, what makes Solana programs feel different to write, and where Anchor fits.
Cairo and StarkNet Contract Development
How Cairo as a language differs from Solidity and Rust, why account abstraction is native to StarkNet, and what writing production StarkNet contracts actually involves.
CosmWasm and Cosmos Smart Contracts
How CosmWasm enables smart contracts on Cosmos chains via WebAssembly, what makes the developer experience distinct from EVM, and why Cosmos's sovereign-chain architecture is a different bet from rollup-style scaling.
Cardano Plutus and EUTxO Contracts
How Cardano's Extended UTXO (EUTxO) model differs fundamentally from Ethereum's account model, what writing Plutus contracts actually involves, and why concurrency on Cardano works differently.
NEAR Contract Model
How NEAR's sharded execution, async cross-contract calls, and storage staking model differ from Ethereum and Solana — and what writing production NEAR contracts looks like.
References & further reading
- primary
- secondary