A couple of problems with this statement:
- .Net is not a programming language. Your comparison is just silly.
- In case you meant to refer to C#, no part of this development process is "point-and-click". In this regard, it is no different to C++ (I develop in both).
- It is not interpreted. Nor has it ever been.
- I think you'll find that the simple programs of "a few dozen lines" that you mention would likely be smaller (3 of lines) in C# than C++. But, again, this is a silly comparison and shouldn't be used in any reasonable comparison. If things like this are a problem, you are just using the wrong libraries; in most cases it has little to do with the language directly.

Oh wow! This looks so much better than I thought it would. Well done! ... Now, to grab that torrent.

Hmmm... Yeah. That used to be true.
It's a lot better now, though.

My current bank (well, credit union. But they are aesthetically the same to me.) doesn't charge me any* fees on my normal accounts and offers ~5% interest on my online-only savings account**.

Though, I keep my savings and credit accounts with separate institutions because I'm paranoid...

--
*At my usage levels, which are pretty normal-use.
**Transferring between both accounts is free.

Not just profits of 'Billions of Dollars', but RECORD profits year after year... During a financial crisis no less.

People aren't upset about the banks making a profit (that's what they're there for). They're upset because the banks continue to make huge profits and then hike fee/rates/etc all the while complaining that "It's getting more expensive to operate in this industry".

Boo hoo!

I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing with you. But it's important to realise that this issue occurs with all other filesystems too, including ext2/3.

If the machine has suddenly lost power, then clearly something 'catastrophic' has occured. This is clearly outside the influence of the developers. Yes, they can insert measures to minimize losses and ext4 already does this -> The journaling will give you an intact older revision of the data.
What else would you suggest be done? I'm not trying to start a flame war. I'm genuinely curious. It's one thing to say that the user is expecting X but if a product is used outside of recommended guidelines, then X can not be guaranteed.

Here's a half-arsed analogy: If I crash my motorcycle because I fell asleep, is that the fault of the manufacturer? Realistically, no.

The answer here is, if your data is soooo important that you can't risk anything going wrong, do the following:
1) Turn caching off. ie: Write directly to the disk. This will kill performance. But at least you can be as sure as possible that the data is written. Alternatively you can manually narrow the cache dump window to something closer to ext3's defaults.
2) Buy a UPS. If the interuption of power is killing your data, just buy an Uninteruptable Power Supply. These things are cheap and, if your data is really that important, you have no excuse not to have one.

As I understand it, the issue is that the default time between cache dumps to disk is 4 seconds. This is much longer than ext2/3. So, if you yank the power cable during this time, on the next reboot ext4 will have no record of the event ever having occured and will use the previously journaled data instead. If this is actually the case, then I don't really consider this a bug. It's just a larger cacheing window. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.