Built-in keyboard - this depends how often or how important for a person text entry is. Certainly for older users that type often or value it more physical keyboard would have very high practical importance [1]. For younger users that write a lot it would also be important.
Desktop browser compatibility have high practical importance. There are many sites that are important (i.e. government sites), but either are hard to navigate or can't be displayed properly. Users may use 20% of sites 80% of time. It does not matter then when they stumble upon a site that is important, but does not work. This sounds like a classic argument of FOSS proponents - everything works except: this game or that printer. In many cases it will be unacceptable.
Additional safety browser extensions and Chrome Remote Desktop are indeed for technical users. However it is meant to cut needed service time - that is of value to the normal users.
Seamless updates are important in a sense that the device is not bugging them and device is always ready to use. That also ensures that device is safe to use. It may be not of high importance to users, but it certainly is of practical importance.
I did not include price previously, but it was mentioned here above. The price is not practical importance per se, but it often overrides everything.
Did you mean to imply there was a logical connection? I'm not sure how 'perceived usage' relates to 'quality'? Surely the two questions are orthogonal? i.e. the less used solution might still be 'better'.
