This is cool. AngularJS having a Chrome-plugin debugger was one of the things that got me interested in trying it out. Powerful, specialized debuggers are always a killer feature for any new framework/system.
I'm now using the wonderful http://visionmedia.github.io/page.js/ which is practically express for the browser. The data binding support was the reason I originally choose Ember, but it turned out to give me very little in how I built that app, it's not a simple CRUD so the opportunities for binding models to views is fairly small. And, in any case, attaching events to those models works just as well for me. I've actually reused some of the concepts I've learned from Ember, such as creating an app container to store global objects, and created a few simple view and container view classes based on those in component.
So again, awesome news.
I couldn't comprehend much of the Ember docs last time I was faced with a decision point on which front-end framework to use.
My personal story is that while I liked Ember, it lacked a bunch of other things that were painful to find elsewhere and integrate with Ember (such as includes). I switched to AngularJS because it gives me all this (and many more) out of the box.
Still, I'm not going to start preaching that AngularJS "greatly exceeds Ember".
It's great to make the decision to focus on simplicity over scope - that's a good, defensible choice and I don't think anyone here will fault you for it. But an honest understanding of the extra features you gave up to make that choice will go a long way.
AngularJS perf on mobile were not that great , Ember came a bit late ,but good luck.
Anyway frameworks only help up to a certain point - you still have to write your application. Just because one picked framework x,y,z don't mean the app is any good.