I'll agree that it is far short of what other systems can do for sharing control, but for the D&D family, it's still heads and tails above all the other versions.
Bad DMing, in my experience at least, is mostly due to inexperience and not being able to keep details consistent in your head. 3rd edition provides a major safety net in this regard; few DMs would deliberately setup a span that was flat out impossible, and most would be more likely to look at the chart to see what a good baseline was than just spouting out a number....
I assume that most people who are driven away from a TTRPG are new players, who definitely are not going to have the experience and knowledge base to know if their DM is typical of game DM's, or just really bad. That first impression is what matters more about "growing" the hobby, and its relevant for all rpgs. Yeah, 3E has lots of rules to constrain what a DM can do, but I think it's a bit much to expect a novice player to be able to sort that stuff
With experienced players, odds are they won't stick with a bad DM for long; after all, they know what to expect from a game. The only exception is of course if DM's are locally rare, and they might not have a choice. Although easy to set up games such as 5E might encourage more DMs
Of course, you can argue that while 3E/4E limit somewhat the mischief a bad DM can do, you could also argue that by putting so much power in players hands, it increases the likelyhood that a player will use RAW to break a game and generally create a unwelcome environment for new gamers. So I would probably argue that all things being equal, no game really is better in this area.
I will however accept one exception. I think a rules light system could be very problematic for any sort of organized play environment, like PFS. Not sure really how WoTC will handle the new edition in that regard.