yeah that's because you don't know how to use it, and you must belong to this vast majority of users that you mentioned yourself ...yeah excuse me but I've used it for years now, so
Well, the entire point was - don't recommend NoScript and similar to a random folk out there until you are sure he's a security nerd comfortable with the obnoxious hassle similar "addons" cause on everyday browser usage. If you disagree, then I'd suggest installing this to your parent's computer or to some random office worker who's abilities are limited to typing into Word and producing "fancy" PPT presentations and have a stopwatch handy to measure how long will it take for them to call you back that you've broken their browser beyond repair.
edit: >>> http://forums.informaction.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3979&p=17380&hilit=chrome#p17376
Most important, sandboxing is definitely overrated (yes, SandboxIE, I'm looking at you).
In this Web 2.0+ age, the ability to touch your hard disk and other system resources (which is what sandboxes try to impair) is not very important anymore: your in-browser password store and the services you access online (e.g. credit card transactions) are the most valuable targets, and an attacker can "own" them even without the need of a browser exploit (a web application vulnerability is enough). Of course, a browser vulnerability is a bonus, but manipulating to the browser process is more than enough, and no sandboxing can help you with that.
Hmmm... there's no in-browser password store with properly configured sandboxed browser, worst case anything you save there gets flushed once the browser closes, better yet disallow this completely. There are also no addons or nothing similar like that. You have a clean browser for banking etc.
Wrt "web application vulnerability" - well, when your bank's site get owned, it's their problem and their damages to bear, not something the customer will pay in the end. Has nothing to do w/ sandboxing at all.