As disappointing as this result is, I'm glad that Ars seems to do science reporting with remarkable clarity.
I'd probably write: NP-complete refers to a special class of notoriously difficult problems. A solution to even one of them would lead to a solution to all of them, a development which could have radical real-world implications. (Insert good example here.)
If I were writing this article, I'd explain NP as above, and then say "research now shows that there are many problems in NP on which quantum computers will offer no improvement."
However, I think that reductions are critical to understanding why we care about NP-complete problems so much. The best example I've been able to give of a reduction is "reducing" addition to subtraction.