I get what you're saying about i18n in the alternate approach. It's harder to do those things there.
But isn't "designed for Chrome and Firefox" just a marginally better thing than "designed for Chrome"? It's still tailor-made for specific browsers, just 2 instead of 1. That's very un-"webby".
This is a problem at big companies like Google and probably Apple, is that we time major sets of released functionality for 'big impact' launches like Google I/O, or other media events, and the poor engineers are left working late into the night to meet the deadlines.
As for just rendering everything with WebGL or Canvas, we could do that (Google Sheets uses Canvas), but it kind of rubs me the wrong way, it doesn't feel "webby". You end up reimplementing tons of stuff: Bidi/I18N text handling, A11Y, system behaviors like text selection, clipboard, it just seems like you're making your own Flash runtime in JS, an alien hybrid that displaces the entire browser engine.
I hope apps like Inbox, and the new focus on mobile web performance by both Google and Mozilla can fix many of these layout/rasterization/composite hazards, either at the spec level (e.g. will-change), or at the implementation level, so much like there is a 'war' on JS performance, there can be a 'war' on layout and paint performance.
Long term, if we want the web to succeed and not be destroyed by mobile native apps, we need it to work -- as the web --, and not as simply opaque WebGL + JS, that's basically just a native app model with a different VM.