Is this a “good enough” random algorithm; why isn’t it used if it’s faster?

Your QuickRandom implementation hasn’t really an uniform distribution. The frequencies are generally higher at the lower values while Math.random() has a more uniform distribution. Here’s a SSCCE which shows that:

package com.stackoverflow.q14491966;

import java.util.Arrays;

public class Test {

    public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
        QuickRandom qr = new QuickRandom();
        int[] frequencies = new int[10];
        for (int i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {
            frequencies[(int) (qr.random() * 10)]++;
        }
        printDistribution("QR", frequencies);

        frequencies = new int[10];
        for (int i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {
            frequencies[(int) (Math.random() * 10)]++;
        }
        printDistribution("MR", frequencies);
    }

    public static void printDistribution(String name, int[] frequencies) {
        System.out.printf("%n%s distribution |8000     |9000     |10000    |11000    |12000%n", name);
        for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
            char[] bar = "                                                  ".toCharArray(); // 50 chars.
            Arrays.fill(bar, 0, Math.max(0, Math.min(50, frequencies[i] / 100 - 80)), '#');
            System.out.printf("0.%dxxx: %6d  :%s%n", i, frequencies[i], new String(bar));
        }
    }

}

The average result looks like this:

QR distribution |8000     |9000     |10000    |11000    |12000
0.0xxx:  11376  :#################################                 
0.1xxx:  11178  :###############################                   
0.2xxx:  11312  :#################################                 
0.3xxx:  10809  :############################                      
0.4xxx:  10242  :######################                            
0.5xxx:   8860  :########                                          
0.6xxx:   9004  :##########                                        
0.7xxx:   8987  :#########                                         
0.8xxx:   9075  :##########                                        
0.9xxx:   9157  :###########                                       

MR distribution |8000     |9000     |10000    |11000    |12000
0.0xxx:  10097  :####################                              
0.1xxx:   9901  :###################                               
0.2xxx:  10018  :####################                              
0.3xxx:   9956  :###################                               
0.4xxx:   9974  :###################                               
0.5xxx:  10007  :####################                              
0.6xxx:  10136  :#####################                             
0.7xxx:   9937  :###################                               
0.8xxx:  10029  :####################                              
0.9xxx:   9945  :###################    

If you repeat the test, you’ll see that the QR distribution varies heavily, depending on the initial seeds, while the MR distribution is stable. Sometimes it reaches the desired uniform distribution, but more than often it doesn’t. Here’s one of the more extreme examples, it’s even beyond the borders of the graph:

QR distribution |8000     |9000     |10000    |11000    |12000
0.0xxx:  41788  :##################################################
0.1xxx:  17495  :##################################################
0.2xxx:  10285  :######################                            
0.3xxx:   7273  :                                                  
0.4xxx:   5643  :                                                  
0.5xxx:   4608  :                                                  
0.6xxx:   3907  :                                                  
0.7xxx:   3350  :                                                  
0.8xxx:   2999  :                                                  
0.9xxx:   2652  :