These are fine and fair responses to a post in this forum. See below for why.
These other people are not mad at someone using the forum the way it was intended; in fact, those other people are also doing the same exact thing in using the forum in the way it was intended. However, their opposition to the OP is based on the attitude that the OP is bringing and lack of work that could have prevented the issue from ever occurring, and by extension, prevented his post and this thread from ever occurring.
I don't think anyone is proclaiming undying love or fealty to MacOS. In fact, there have been plenty of people here saying to use the OS that is best for what one needs. In this case, however, the important word is USE. From the OP's post, it was presented that the OP didn't USE the OS to its potential; in particular, the use of the tools to prevent any sort of disaster in which to recover from. That is also part of the USE of MacOS. But instead of looking into those tools to use, he chose to blame the OS for letting him down, when the onus to protect himself, his data, and the USE of his peripherals clearly fell upon him.
That isn't, once again, the fault of Apple; that is the fault of the user and the lack of USE of MacOS at hand. If that functionality was available since Leopard, that's 13 years worth of having the tools available to protect a user from any sort of disaster, let alone to recover back to the last best known working state. Why that wasn't used prior to any upgrade is only an answer that the OP can provide; to date, it hasn't been provided.
What methods would this be?
If your Mac is still under active support, you do not, and are not actively forced to upgrade your version of MacOS. Users of Big Sur are not forced to upgrade to Monterey, as Big Sur is still supported. Users of Catalina are not forced to upgrade, as that is still supported. And even with that, those Macs that are still hardware supported are still good with security updates for their OS being used, if that OS is still supported.
And as the OP just found out, "latest features" != stability. I found that out with my MBA and High Sierra, which is why I dropped back to Sierra after High Sierra came out. I've been rock solid on Sierra and supported throughout the entire SDLC of Sierra, up until my Mac was moved to Obsolete status. Hell, even some security updates that were released are still available for my Mac, so to say that it is a flippant remark is disingenuous.
That is different and irrelevant to the actual OS being upgraded the way that the OP upgraded. One should always... ALWAYS see if the hardware and software requirements are met and/or supported by the hardware/software in general. If not, you have the choice: stay with what works and is stable, or upgrade and take the chance that your hardware doesn't work. The OP rolled the dice with the latter option, and rolled up snake-eyes; not once, but twice when you add in that the research into if his hardware will work with the upgrade was not done.
Again, that is on the OP, not the OS, and blaming the OS and everything around him for his lack of research is just as disingenuous. That is what everyone is in arms about. Like I said before; if that research was done and questions asked on if that hardware would be supported, then everyone here would have a lot more sympathy and empathize with the OP's woes. That wasn't done, so it is hard to show sympathy for when the lack of work was not done or shown; hence, the responses given.
BL.