If you want people to not use Electron, you'll need to provide an alternative that makes it just as easy to develop sophisticated, platform-independent applications. Otherwise, no amount of complaining about Electron will ever stop devs from using Electron.
You seem to focus on the outcome while what interests me is the programming model. Say what you want about object-oriented programming, the problem-space lends itself very well to it. In Qt/Swing/… components are just classes whose behaviour and appearance are determined by function overrides, taking as parameter event or graphics objects. Just like that, you cleanly solve everything that "webcomponents" stands for: interface contracts are determined by class constructors/parameters, customisation is just class inheritance with member override, look&feel customisation is plain calls into the graphics API primitives, layouting/responsive-design is taken care of at the just level of abstraction, and all of it takes place in the same language and ecosystem/stdlib (no HTML to CSS to JS references to keep in sync and mental overhead).
React reproduces some of this model, but with much more technical and mental complexity, bringing trade-offs of its own. I'm not calling this easier to work with, simpler, or easier to debug. It certainly gives more creative options, but only because the ecosystem is broader (and full of supply-chain risks).
Even non-power users pay the cost, they just don't realize it yet.
But as long as users still need Apple/Microsoft/Google's platforms to be able to run Electron apps, those corps won't care, specially if it takes devs away from the toolchains controlled by them.
Maybe if someone can come up with a pure Electron OS that can run on any device, it might force Windows/Apple/Android to agree on a universal native UI API?
>sophisticated
You confuse complexity for sophistication.
