I wouldn't say it's "not up to the challenge" insomuch that like when you want to convince someone to not use Chrome, you're running into the problem that you have to create a framework under which the amount of problem Chrome can be can actually be measured/registered.

People always assume "Yeah but the average user doesn't care", but never truly read that line and realize what it implies.

It's not that my mum opens Chrome, sees that it's 74/100 on the problematic-software-you-shouldn't-use-scale, and then decided to use it anyways.She opens it. That's it. It ends there.

There is no "This is a 74/100 problem".There is no problematic-software-you-shouldn't-use-scale.There is no scale.There isn't even the conceptual idea for it, and hence no reason or impetus to ever internally have such a scale.

And now comes an important question: Why? Or rather, why not?

And the answer is both easier and also impossibly harder than most of us trying to convince others would want to accept: Because it doesn't matter.To my mum, she couldn't give a flying fuck what others think about Chrome, she wants to open a web page. She has actual problems in her actual life, she doesn't care a rat's arse what the tiny computer she looks up the weather and contacts her kids on does to allow her to do that internally. She's worried about her health, about her colon surgery healing or about her mum (my grandma is 93) having fallen down.