While I don’t agree with Vispilio’s tone, the argument(s) made are valid if not lacking actual examples. This article is an opinion piece based on Techcrunch’s and the author’s opinions. Everyone is allowed their opinions but some of the arguments are mighty weak.
“Transactions are too expensive” -pennies per transactions is too expensive? This is relative to say, Western Union fees or bank wire transfers?
“The technology is getting old” -what is this based on? ETH and the problems it is trying to solve is still sound. Whether it succeeds is a different question.
“Newer more scalable blockchains will eclipse it” -again, based on what? Promises made by teams to increase prices during ICO? There are a lot of new coins claiming to be an Ethereum “killer” but the problem is they are no where near the development milestones as Ethereum.
“Developers will migrate to more “shiny” ecosystems” -totally baseless and shows that author is not a developer or works with crypto knowledgeable developers. Ethereum has the largest number of developers compared to any other coin. Why? Partly because the Ethereum platform has the most dev tools available for developers to make apps.
“ The Ethereum network is like a shared car. When a contract wants to be driven by the shared car, the car uses up fuel, which you have to pay the driver for. How much gas money you owe depends on how far you had to be driven and how much trash you left in the car. — TechCrunch”
^^^ This has got to be the most misinformation I’ve read to date about crypto. The ETH network is nothing like a shared car. It is an ecosystem where transactions based on a smart contract uses gas as a fee to make the transaction which is used to pay other users (miners) as they verify the transaction. If you want your transaction processed faster, you pay a higher amount. Where the rest of the analogy comes from is pure garbage but one can not expect much from a web site that has bloggers as “journalists”.