Hmm we use nodejs currently and works great for us, despite it being in the "early days", meteor is a full-ledge solution.. Im talking about using modules from NPM that can work on the server and client today, right now.
Angular 2.0 is still in the design and architectural phase, maybe in the future it will be released but who knows exactly when.
Isomorphic promotes the re-use of code on the client and server.. instead of writing 2x the amount of logic services. So I'm not sure I follow your comment about it being unnecessary. Angular 1.3+ only introduced one-time binding after realizing that watchers and digesting all of those watchers is a performance issue prior to that you had to use a third-party library such as bindonce or not use it altogether.
The major problem with angular is the fact that it is a kitchen sink framework, you cannot use a piece of the framework without inheriting the whole thing. Personally I prefer flexibility.
Man did you go off and rant... some points to make: angular templating is logic filled compared to say something like mustache templates which are not, why do i need logic in HTML and in JS ? two-way databinding is majority of the time unnecessary, heck they even brought in one-time binding which should cue you into something *performance*. Isomorphic is great way to re-use code ie: your templates again or a http/xhr service that can be used client and server think what meteor is doing. The re-factor or 2.0 won't be available for a while.. so cant use that argument
I wouldn't call it "needlessly aggressive", I think he's voicing his frustrations and if that is the tone that is set.. so be it, he shouldn't have pull back and sugar coat anything. Angular was meant to be used in larger situations rather than pet projects but you are correct it becomes something thats need to be wrestled especially if you are not build from ground up.