I think (but don't quote me on this) there are 24 geostationary GPS satelites around the planet and to get a fix on your location you only need 3 (ideally 4 to check the others for errors). This is why it's called triangulation
If they are to switch off some of these satellites I would expect them to do it gradually as to minimise any impact on existing systems but with so many available and in view of a point on the Earth's surface at any time you can afford to lose a few without too much trouble.
Yep - you are correct: you need 4 satellites for a fix with altitude information.
They are always switching satellites off and graveyarding them - satellites have a lifespan and then they are usually replaced and retired. GPS have been replacing and retiring satellites for years - I think there have been about 5 blocks so far. Each block will have enhanced payloads and buses: for example, spot beams, better clocks, etc.
A certain number of spacecraft can be lost from orbit before the system starts to degrade. It would usually result in longer acquisition times rather than reduced accuracy. GPS are not geo-stationary and operate in LEO (Low Earth Orbit), so, they are constantly moving with respect to fixed positions on the ground. If you can't see enough, another will come over the horizon in 20 minutes!
I like maps and I like GPS - I am actually pretty good with both. Therefore, I have no issue with the use of GPS. If technology makes life easier, why not adopt it?
There are a number of enhancements to improve accuracy, like Differential GPS, eGPS and WAAG (which I think is now available outside the States), and the fact that the Civil Aviation Authorities are looking to mandate GPS-assisted landings makes a mockery of the original premise of this thread that GPS was 'fading away'!
Where do journalists get this rubbish?