[railsjedi]

Sorry, I just meant compared to Rails in terms of impact. Ember is nothing like Rails architecturally. There's a good comparison here: http://emberjs.com/guides/ember_mvc/

So yeah. Ember's problem is convincing people there's a problem (hint: there definitely is).

[MatthewPhillips]

Those are implementations details, to the developer they serve a similar purpose. This is my problem with it, a web framework that gives equal weight to M, V, and C is missing the point; in the client the View is fucking everything. It is where any developer will spend the vast majority of their time; not in code organization. The frameworks and I mean this plurally, that win will be those that give structure to applications. Here's how the Android SDK provides structure to applications: http://developer.android.com/design/patterns/app-structure.h.... Web frameworks need the same thing. They should ship with HTML, JS, and CSS.

[wycats]

Just because a framework has models, views and controllers does not mean it gives them "equal weight".

[jguimont]

Then you do not understand what M and C does. It might be called a client but it is a stateful client. Views come and go , you organize your code in C and M and you'll have a robust long lasting application (in a desktop app, a mobile app or a browser app).

[MatthewPhillips]

> Views come and go , you organize your code in C and M and you'll have a robust long lasting application (in a desktop app, a mobile app or a browser app).

That's because we're not writing good reusable views. We're writing one-off views that corresponding to the current needs of the current application we're working on. Here's a good view: http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#DOCUMENTATION/UIKit/...

It was created 5 years ago and I'm pretty sure it's got a lot of life left in it still.

[erikbryn]

Perhaps you'd be a fan of SproutCore?