There is no rich IDE which integrates common tasks when compared with Visual Studio.
Both Eclipse and NetBeans support Ruby and Python development. Eclipse supports Ruby and Python (along with Tck) development through the Dynamic Languages Toolkit. Eclipse also provides plugins such as the PyDev Python environment and Aptana Studio (available as a standalone tool or a plugin to an existing Eclipse environment).
I've only used PyDev and an older version of Aptana Studio, but at least those integrate nicely with the Eclipse environment. These plugins provide support for not only syntax highlighting, code formatting, and refactoring, but also integrate into the version control tools that also integrate into Eclipse. Aptana also provides deployment tools in the Ruby on Rails environment.
I'm not sure exactly what you are looking for, but there are tools out there that are more full featured than a standard text editor, although my understanding is that many Ruby and Python developers favor text editors over IDEs (and that's why there aren't a ton of IDEs for these languages, as compared to C, C++, and Java).
If you want to write a Windows based application with either Python or Ruby, you have to search around and pick from the large number of variants like wxRuby, fxRuby, wxPython, PyQt etc.
What you listed as examples aren't variants. They are graphical libraries for these languages that provide the tools that you need to build GUIs in Ruby and Python. The same thing goes for C and C++. If you want to build a GUI-driven application in C or C++ on Windows (without using Microsoft Visual C++), you'll also have to choose a graphical library such as wxWidgets, GTK+, Qt, or others.
This choice would have to be made on Mac and Linux as well. Neither Python nor Ruby provide a built-in graphical toolkit included in their standard language packages. Don't feel like Windows developers are getting shafted here, because it's not the case. It's the thought of the language developers and designers to not include a specific toolkit, but allow developers to choose their own tools as appropriate for the project.
Both Java and the .NET framework have toolkits built in. For example, Java has AWT and Swing built in, but you can also choose to use an implementation of Qt for Java (as an example). The .NET framework provides access to the Microsoft Foundation Classes, Windows Forms, and Windows Presentation Framework, although you can again opt to use a different toolkit.
Just because some languages (Java, the various languages on the .NET framework) provide built in options doesn't mean they are any better or worse than languages that don't (Ruby, Python, C++). And even those languages with built-in GUI toolkits still provide options. For example, a number of Java applications (including the Eclipse IDE, last time I checked) use SWT as their GUI toolkit, which is not built into the language, but an external library.
I'm not sure what the problem is. Choices are good. You can choose the libraries and toolkits that would best enable you to solve your problems.
Even if you pick, it is hard to get started as most of the time answers are unavailable even at StackOverflow. If you get stuck somewhere, there is no one to guide you. You have to rely on limited docs and forums only.
I've found this to not be the cast at all.
I've only touched Ruby twice in my career, and both in a classroom setting, but I've done a small bit of Python. I found the Python documentation to be very accessible (coming close, if not exceeding, the Java documentation). There are also a number of posts on Stack Overflow about both Python (66,909 questions) and Ruby (27,142 questions, including questions also tagged "rails") with less than 10% of questions in either of them unanswered. There are also other forums, mailing lists, and IRC channels for both languages that appear to be widely used.
There are also a number of books on both languages, updated regularly. I know the Pragmatic Programmers publish books on Ruby (Programming Ruby) and Ruby on Rails (Agile Web Development with Rails), keeping them up-to-date when a newer major version comes out. I'm not sure about Python books - I've begun to shy away from programming language books as the languages are changing incredibly quickly.
Do you feel scattered tools and lack of rich IDE makes Ruby and Python suitable for hobbysts?
To answer your headline question: absolutely not. There is plenty of widespread professional development happening with Ruby and Python.
The Python website provides a list of organizations using the language. Besides Google, you have Yahoo!, hunch Walt Disney Feature Animation, the National Weather Service, Los Alamos National Laboratory, NASA, Red Hat, Nokia, University of California at Irvine, and IBM. A number of games also include Python code, such as Battlefield 2 and Civilization 4. Python is also used in education at a number of universities.
For Ruby, a similar page exists that lists success stories. The NASA Langley Research Center, Motorola, Google Sketchup, Lucent, and Level 3 Communications are on this list. That isn't even including applications built using the Ruby on Rails framework.
I think that it's fairly easy to get into Python and Ruby - the set up time is low, there isn't a steep learning curve, and the documentation on both their sites is (in my opinion) well written. I think that this makes it easy for hobbyists to pick them up, but that doesn't make them hobbyist languages at all.