I don't fully understand it...but my harshest criticism of it is that they haven't updated it...but then again, if they choose to update it eventually, after all the other coins have tested out the changes, that's quite alright I suppose. Even at it's highest, the worst was that it cost as much as a wire transfer.
Of course, who you're speaking of understand it far less than even I do.
Time has proven that we who did want Bitcoin to upgrade were perhaps a bit hasty with our criticisms. It still needs to be upgraded, but the value that it needed to be upgraded for was only a peak. I certainly hope they upgrade it to allow for such values, if it reaches them for more than just a peak, but they need to be sure about the changes.
As to the articles...I don't even bother reading them, since the idiots just repeat the same thing over and over again. That's pretty well proof it's propaganda, whether there's truth in it or not.
I agree with you about the upgrades. Though I have read some that say the lack of upgrades is a positive as opposed to a negative. They say that is what makes bitcoin important as a store of value. The fact that it doesn't upgrade and change every month likely will help give people more confidence to trust it as a store of value.
It likely shouldn't be updated every month, but it certainly is annoying when you can't use a coin because the price spiked. Ideally, anything should update as much as they need to, but not too often.
I just found it funny that what many say is a criticism of bitcoin, others say is a feature. One man's trash is another man's treasure I guess...
They say the same about Linux distros...and they're right to a point. I'm on a bleeding edge distro. Occasionally I have issues with conflicts, but not so often. Supposedly other distros are more "stable" by using code that is often months or even years old...but they also are a security liability. Nowhere near what Windows is, of course.