I don't have the data but I doubt that XRP is any close to become more mainstream than Bitcoin as a global currency. Since the very first time, I think everyone would know that making Bitcoin a global currency that is agreed by all government in the world and unionize them is very radical idea. It would need an extreme level of political will of every governments to agree to accept something that is not controlled by single entity as a common currency for all, currency means power, we can see how US dominate politic and economy with USD, and we are now watching how China are trying to take those throne on USD with their RNB.

My point is, the worst could happened, Bitcoin may still be an investment in 10 or 20 years or even we may will not see, in our lifetime that Bitcoin become global common currency, but at least we are some of few people who are trying to start a decentralized currency that we all agreed is better than the current centralized system.

I wonder what were the achievement of these two altcoins?  Is it far from the achievement of Bitcoin? If yes, why are these two altcoins still below the dominance of Bitcoin?  Aside from that it is in contrast with the idea of P2P if Bitcoin is to entrust its ecosystem to banks.  Since Bitcoin promotes freedom in transactions, I don't think there is a need to partner with banks since it will hinder the growth and promulgation of the concept Bitcoin is aiming to provide.  Aside from that XRP developers had been milking their supporters for years through their monthly unlocking of XRP holdings to sell in the market.

Is Bitcoin an asset or a payment system? The answer is - both! Bitcoin was created as a peer-to-peer electronic cash system, yes, but its deflationary nature - the halving events you mention - make it an attractive store of value. The 'double-edged sword' lies not in Bitcoin but in our perception of its utility. Lets not forget, Bitcoin transactions are irreversible, offering a level of freedom from traditional financial systems.

As for XRP, its centralized nature makes it a different animal altogether. It can partner with banks because it's designed to be a bridge currency. Different strokes for different folks.

Would I part with my Bitcoin? Depends on the opportunity cost. If the utility of using it as a payment method surpasses holding it as an asset, absolutely. Make sense?

As long as people can make profits out of Bitcoin investment, they will consider it as an asset. Bitcoin is a multipurpose cryptocurrency. You can use it as an asset or use it as a payment system as it was created. You are the one who will determine what you want to use it as.

Banks and governments will never choose Bitcoin, because it is decentralized. No matter what, they can't control it. And for this reason only, they will never choose Bitcoin as their main choice. There are other factors that are included here too. But they are minor things that XRP and other cryptocurrencies have too. They are not much of a problem.

When all the Bitcoin will be mined, we may see stability in the market. Maybe then people will use it as a payment method rather than an investment asset. But that's a long way to go. Only time will tell.

Just accept this and be contempted with bitcoin, as long as nothing changed about the initial plan for it creation then don't ever expect anything strange or funny to see bitcoin turn to, this digital currency is a decentralized coin that can't be influenced by anyone, it's rather depends on the protocols on which it was developed, bitcoin will always remain a decentralized digital currency, asset and investment with nothing more. 

Yeah, I know right, the only reason why mentioned XRP it's mentioned in the OP's post. The only thing that can put Both Bitcoin and XRP on the same category is because both are cryptocurrency, but still Bitcoin is decentralized, while XRP was controlled by Ripple, I also don't think that Bitcoin are in anyway comparable to XRP.

Have Bitcoin existed for that long to become a global currency, I don't think so, Bitcoin still needs time to develop and drive its worth in the market before gaining that public attraction that could possibly make it a generally acceptable currency.
Take gold for example since gold is in the same asset category like Bitcoin, gold have exist for a long time now for several generations but yet it has not gained the mainstream adoption Bitcoin is just 14 to 15 years in existence so we need to give it more time before we could possibly see that level of adoption.

Decentralized vs  Centralized? with that alone then you could already tell which one is really that preferable but of course it would really be having that different supporters or investors backing into it.Different coins have different set of OG's on which those people or investors had really been able to trust up those coins in the first days or years of its existence which neither they do have that investment intent or really that supporting into its utility or could be both then it would really be depending on a certain person but what matter the most is that they do cherish out that extreme returns of their investment on the time that they had able to hold for long term.
It is really just that cant be avoided for you to be jealous out of those money that they had able to make on that time. This is why people would really be that mindful in regarding with their investment and holding up for long term but of course it cant be possible on to those top coins that we do have now. It isnt something that could give out 10x or 100x so easily and this is why they would really be opting for altcoins.