How we built our app in 2 weeks using Ionic Framework

That said, I've used Ractive for a while (on my own time), and haven't run into any issues. But I'm curious to know more and would like to try it out. Could you give me an example where data binding would cause errors?

Please don't shout. HTML and JS were developed to run on any device, past, present and future. HTML is actually pretty good at presenting most UI state along with documents - the UI of the vast majority of native device apps is really not hard to present as html, the only roadblock is the vendors lack of focus on mobile web view performance. JS is a mixed bag, and as you say pretty rushed, and not the favourite language of many - I wouldn't want to write an app in it, though of course it is possible.

The choice developers are presented with here is to commit to learning each new API/Language on the continually shifting sands of OS vendor APIs for multiple vendors/devices, or to commit to an open but less performant toolkit they know will be around for a while, but which has the advantage of being stable, cross platform, and not tied to any specific vendor.

Clearly you don't feel the pressure of being tied to specific vendors and having to produce multiple binaries on a growing array of platforms both mobile and desktop, but others do, and this is mostly why they choose to use web tech on mobile or desktop. It's a very political and economic choice not one based on language syntax or capabilities alone, if you attempt to simply compare C and js on a technical level for example you will fail to understand why the choice is made. I fully expect that trend of web everywhere to increase if/when HTML starts offering more choice of languages (NaCl/asm.js) and perhaps more sophisticated layout (though for present uses it's not bad for that purpose). At that point, why choose a native API which will be deprecated in 5 years, when you can truly write once and run anywhere (web, mobile, desktop).

The people native apps benefit the most is OS vendors, because of lock-in, for both consumers and developers having a more open cross platform tech is clearly desirable (easy to switch platforms or for developers serve all platforms), even if not fully practical at present.

I don't buy that statement. In college we'd write a small program in assembler, then write that same program in C and compare the generated assembler code. The generated code was always longer than the hand-written code and often times significantly longer.

The main reason we don't write assembler anymore is we don't need to!

I don't know – as a developer with many years of experience, from assembly to web technologies, I think I'm pretty qualified to make this comparison :)

No compiler can write C better than even a mediocre programmer

That's not true at all – there are a whole bunch of examples which transpile other languages to C. The point is to work in a system that effectively communicate's ones intentions – that fact that it's C underneath is almost irrelevant.

Everything is assembly underneath, so I don't think anyone would say that it is useless unless they had part of their brain stem missing

I'd argue the same for the combo of Javascript, HTML and CSS, given that it's one of the few cross-platform tool for building user interfaces. Anybody arguing that it's useless is missing the big picture.

HTML and JS have no place on mobile(aside from fools trying to shove them on there, hence my rant), they could be completely removed from the equation and nothing would change

I mean, they clearly do. Otherwise, we wouldn't have a web, and every site that currently exists would be accessed through a native app. That's obviously silly.

and people who actually want to build good products rather than SHIP AS FAST AS POSSIBLE AT THE LOWEST COST POSSIBLE ON EVERY PLATFORM SIMULTANEOUSLY SO WE CAN MAKE THE MOST PROFIT POSSIBLE FUCK IF IT RUNS LIKE SHIT could chug along making great products

No, there's a distinct tradeoff to be made. Let's say you're a service with a small staff trying to publish a mobile app. You obviously need it to work across multiple platforms, given the current state of the market. In many cases, the cost of maintaining two separate codebases, and two separate teams, will simply not be worth the expense. If you are delivering a relatively simple app, then it's something that could quite possibly be built using the web stack – sacrificing some quality of UX in exchange for actually having a shipping product at all.

The UX of a native app will continue to be better for the moment. But the gap has closed significantly in the past couple of years, and I don't see any reason that it won't continue to do so, as platform developers and others work to fix the remaining issues.

The developers that feel they "aren't that bad" are probably ones who haven't used anything else and don't even care to try, which is why they are trying to make them work on mobile.

I've personally developed native applications for Android, iOS and Blackberry, and have also developed a couple of cross-platform apps that ran across all three with Phonegap. The UX wasn't as good as fully-native apps would have been, but building multiple apps would not have been cost-effective in these cases, and the output wasn't all that bad. So I guess that invalidates your point.

Netflix on all other platforms - roku, chrome cast is all native as well.

Not sure about ios.