> I can't imagine anything being easier than plain HTML and CSS
Well you can still make websites with plain HTML and CSS today, and the layout modes (and other niceties like border-radius) that are available today so are much nicer than the ones that were available 20 years AND they work the same in every browser!
20 years ago you were cobbling together layout with tables and floats (you didn't even have `display: inline-block`). And people still wanted vaguely responsive layouts even though there weren't any media queries yet. Plus there were 3-4 major browser engines that you needed to test with, and there were often major differences in both feature support, bugs and layout between them. For example you had to deal with the fact that IE used what is now known as `box-sizing: border-box` while other browsers used `box-sizing: content-box`, and the fact that browsers didn't even parse HTML consistently you could easily end up with different node tree in different browsers.
There are 3. Safari is distinct from Chrome these days (even though they are derived from a common base). The fact that you consider them the same is evidence of what I'm saying: that differences in rendering between browsers tend to be minimal these days :)
Combine that with the fact that loops and objects don’t have fantastic support, if any, and it’s no wonder everyone and their mother has tried their hand at a templating framework. (WebComponents exist, but fall into a lot of the same traps; I didn’t like what I saw in the MDN tutorial.)
