GPG [And PGP As A Whole] Is Really Good For What It Is And The Recent Vulnerabilities Don't Mitigate That.
The Alternatives All Have Shitty Ideologies Baked Into Them Causing Usability Problems [See: Age Not Supporting Keyrings] And Are Excessively Minimal [See: Age Also Not Supporting Signing, With The User Having To Then Use Usually SSH Or Minisign To Provide Authenticity].
Then There's The Usual "GPG Has Been Around Since 1999 And Has Been Consistently Reliable". 1 Of The Alternatives Consistently Suggested To GPG's Symmetric Encryption, Picocrypt, Got Abandoned Recently, And The Official Advice Is "Avoid Using Certain Features So The CLI Version Can Continue To Decrypt Your Files".
For Symmetric Encryption You Could Use OpenSSL But That's Easy To Fuck Up And Make Super Insecure, And I've Had Issues Decrypting Files Encrypted With OpenSSL Only 20 Years Ago.
I've Noticed Allot Of The Anti-PGP Crowd Are Just Signal Shills Who Insist That Signal And Similar Are "More Secure" Then PGP, Which Is Fucking Hilarious, And Their Arguments Often Boil Down To "PGP Gives The User *Too Much* Choice" [The User Can Choose To Send Decrypted Information Across The Channels They Use PGP].
I Don't Think There's Currently A Better Alternative, And I Wonder How Much Of The PGP Discourse Is Just An Attempt To Get People To Use No Encryption Or Verification At All, After They See People Claiming That PGP Is Bad, Then They Try The Other [Worse] Tools, And Decide That Encryption And Verification As A Whole Are Shit And Give Up On Them.