There's a lot to unpack here and a lot of this will be down to personal preference

1. I think that static TN (SR4+) is mathematically broken and was a wrong idea. But I can see why CGL stuck with that later on
2. There is not that big difference between SR4 and SR5. Latter can be a bit less swingy because of limits but also that means that SR5 has another thing to check when rolling
3. Because of lack of limits, "meta" in SR4 is to invest in Initiative stat
4. They added wireless in this edition and while I do think it was needed it got a bit too shoehorned
5. Matrix is a bit faster than SR3- but still not good IMO. But I'm from the camp that prefers SRA2.0 Matrix, YMMV

In itself it's not a bad edition, it just has it quirks (as all of them do)

Also, there is !shadowrun@sh.itjust.works ;)

I've been told it's downhill from 4e. I don't know though, i don't do SR.

4th is easier to understand, the logic behind roll are streamlined and I find it easier on the GM (TL; DR 4th is the one with huge dice pool)

5th matrix is somewhat what the internet is looking right now, the goal was clearly to bring back the hacker and putting him at equal rank with a Technomancer. However I find that it is harder on the GM (TL; DR 5th is the one with [Limit])

On a narrative stand point the quality of stories and fluff is downgrading since the SR4 but that’s my opinion

Personally I find that there’s better game to play Shadowrun … but SR4 have great plot points