Why is Bitcoin (and Ethereum to a degree as well) still seen as “the future”, when they are technologically inferior to many alternate coins?

When looking at the crypto marketplace, I see many coins such as Hedera, Solana, and Cardano to name a few, who are massively superior in most senses like energy consumption, transactional speed and security, and gas fees, to the major coins such as BTC and ETH. And yet, these big cryptos are still seen as the currency of the future. Is this just because they’re considered the “early movers” in the market and have garnered public knowledge before these altcoins, or is there something that makes these larger coins different and “better”? For me, I can see BTC and ETH becoming like the “Yahoo” of early internet, and one of these other, more efficient and refined coins becoming the “Google”, or the natural evolution of an early, growing space into maturity. Thoughts?

Edit: seems as though most found this post quite controversial. Truthfully, I shouldn’t have written it with such a demeaning attitude towards BTC and ETH, because I do think they have their place which I neglected to cover. BTC is probably the best “store of value” in the space, and due to public perception, probably always will be. ETH is trying to address their issues with ETH2, which I’m curious to see how that comes about in what shape or form it eventually does. Will they achieve what they’re trying to before any of these other coins achieve decentralization or better security? That remains to be seen. I know some of them have pointed out pathways to do so. And I still believe that some aspects of their tech are superior to the major coins, but the concerns raised were legitimate. Regardless, I’m just an average guy who has no particular expert knowledge of crypto in general, just asking something that I genuinely was curious about because it’s a question I’ve heard from others before. Didn’t really intend for it to be a shot at any coin though I know it did sound that way