I think the 'get it' thing has been overused as a justification for people who just refuse to believe that it wasn't that good to some fans. Over the years I have seen people act like you had to be some kind of unique genius on a rare cosmic wavelength to love it and everyone else was sadly lacking. I see this as an 'emperor's new clothes' type of thing, no matter what you say, he was still naked.
I also have to add (at the risk of being flamed) that the image of the band at the time had a lot to do with turning some of the older fans off. It was like, WTF? What are they trying to prove, and why? The Halloween-eque costumes, the outrageous, blinding set, the comments from Bono about hating rock and roll and fuck the past, that kind of made people mad at them, the way you would be mad at a friend who had suddenly changed on you. I don't think there's a person on this board who hasn't had an experience with a friend, or an ex significant other, or even a relative you no longer speak to, or didn't for awhile, because they had changed so much from what you loved in them. It's only human. I hope Edge understands that. It's because people love U2 so much and feel so close to them that it can get that way.
I 'get' the concept fine, the irony, selling themselves as a product, materialism, etc., but it doesn't make the songs sound any better to me either. I can't see how that has anything to do with it. Like I said I like plenty of songs I don't 'get.' How can I 'get' Sgt. Pepper when I've never done LSD? But I love it anyway! I 'get' that Tool's "24 and 6" is about football, a team and a game that are very special to me, but I still don't enjoy listening to the song because of the style. It's NOT a matter of getting it, just personal taste as to what each person does or does not find appealing to listen to.