I am also one of the developers of the original Goo Create (worked on it between 2014 and the end of 2016) and I can confirm it is indeed the same app (including colors, icons, etc). Amazon basically just added some integrations with AWS and a new logo.
As others have mentioned, this is all possible with Angular >=4, both in WebStorm and VSCode. The main issue is with performance and debugging. Using Angular's AoT compilation is still extremely slow and your squiggly lines take several seconds to show up after you modify a template in your editor. And no stepping through templates either when trying to debug why something isn't rendering properly.
But, imho, the biggest problem with Angular, by far, are it's NgModules. You can't just import a component normally and use it in your template. You need to also add it to an NgModule to make it available in the templates of the components inside that NgModule. And if for some reason you stop using a component, you need to remember to clean up the module as well since nothing will warn you about unused declarations or imports in NgModules.
And then there is also the fact that you can't directly import a function/constant and use it directly in the template because, like Components, the template engine needs to be told about it. So you need to add properties to your component class which are just providing access to things you imported above. So. Much. Pain.
Some people really like templating languages but imho just using TSX (which is just mapping to function calls) and normal ES modules is the best solution by far.
Problem is you get a cumbersome templating language, extremely verbose component declarations, even more verbose dynamic components and a bunch of other horrible stuff.
In React it is a breeze to make Higher Order Components to connect to a store and it also makes it much easier to separate those smart components from small reusable presentation components.
I have seen people shy away from making smaller components just because Angular makes it so damned painful to make components. It is just easier to stuff everything in a template and copy paste everything around, which leads to a serious case of spaghetti code. I am happy for you if you don't have to work with something like that. I do, and I can tell you it is not nice in any way.
If you don't like TS stay away from Angular. In fact, just stay away from Angular, even if you like TS. You will save yourself a lot of headaches...but hey with Angular you might be able to hire some cheap/junior programmers who are familiar with OOP or move some backend guys who like C#/Java to do frontend.
However, to me it's not really that Angular is bad in itself, it's more that the alternatives (React/Inferno/Preact combined with redux or MobX) are just superior in so many ways, and by a huge margin.
Once you've done React with TS/TSX, with type checked components all the way, great code completion, incredible performance...it's hard to go back.
Angular's components would be ok if React didn't allow you to declare functional components in just a few lines of code, create HOC to decorate exiting components, etc. Angular's components are certainly better than Angular 1's but when you compare it with what you can do with React it just can't compete.
Honestly, from my experience, there is not a single thing that Angular does better than React and friends. Not a single one. It does things better than Angular 1/Ember/Backbone but that's it.
I think this is a bit like the solar/renewables revolution that is happening in energy. There are more efficient combustion engines, filters and whatnot, but when you compare them with the other paradigm, it falls short.
The definitive answer to this question is: it sells itself better to managers. The truth is that for many good and bad reasons, people with decision-making power are scared of dependencies.
My company uprooted a few months of React development because Angular (2) comes with batteries included and we wouldn't have to rely on third-party stuff to fill in the gaps. The amount of stuff you get is... not actually that much, but it's enough to sell it. Of course, our new package.json is just as long, if not longer using Angular than it was before, and I've spent arguably more time doing setup (before @angular/cli stabilised) than I ever did with React. The whole @angular/router situation with module loading is silly, who wants to load modules via strings? Yes, the default batteries-included parts work with each other very well for the basics, but what about power and flexibility?
React could go a long way in this regard just by having a few more official ways of doing things and offering a few tools straight up (a @react/router for instance) while still selling the just-part-of-a-wonderful-ecosystem thing. React is so much better at satisfying real development needs, like the hyper-extensibility via functional composition and the super-DRY code you can get out of it very quickly, that proving its worth in ways that are only superficially important would be well worth it.
This makes me feel sad. As you said, maybe React could do more when it comes to packaging things up. I think Create React App is a good step in that direction but there is still work to be done.
I prefer VSC too, but no harm in trying out the improvements in Atom.
There's one feature/plugin in Atom that I wish VSC had, which is browser-plus. I haven't found anything comparable in VSC, which is a shame as it'd be useful when iterating through website designs.
