The basic problem is how do you even adress the "user experience" on a chart like this? All you'd end up doing is throwing your personal opinions about the device into the mix, which would ruin the objectivity of the chart.
You're right - which makes comparisons like this even more pointless. I like that there's a cost breakdown - math like this is important, but doesn't run through your average consumer's head (not this precisely anyhow). Besides the price tag, the only remaining thing to do is go out and play with one.
It's a little like doing car comparisons by mere horsepower and cargo space - sounds relevant on paper, but in reality not so much... the only valuable advice is "test drive them all". In the end your satisfaction with your car probably has little to do with the fact that it has 20% more cargo space than the nearest competitor.
Keep fighting the good fight. Making documents that highlight relatively unimportant aspects of a device when talking about the device's value in general is an implicit endorsement of those qualities as the important ones. If this sheet was a titled "raw material breakdown" or something like that, it would be fine. As it is, this piece communicates something entirely different than the raw specifications.
It's a little like doing car comparisons by mere horsepower and cargo space - sounds relevant on paper, but in reality not so much... the only valuable advice is "test drive them all". In the end your satisfaction with your car probably has little to do with the fact that it has 20% more cargo space than the nearest competitor.