I'm not saying you can't build larger applications using Backbone, I'm just saying the journey to completing one and then maintaining it will be harder. Large javascript application used to bw written without any frameworks but I'm not bringing them up as examples. What would be interesting to see would be the same examples written across frameworks in terms of code written, code organization, maintainability and size.
The main issue as I see it is that people choose a framework for a project in a short period of time and larger frameworks tend to take time before you see where they shine. I hear people's reason for going with Backbone because it was really the first major MVC out there and because of it's popularity. When I hear why people go with another framework it's because of features - not popularity.
Add on to this whenever I've talked to people or read blogs on systems made with other frameworks the majority of talks on backbone are how to solve problems they encountered while talks about larger frameworks are how to use new features and get more from your code. Maybe it's just because Backbone has been around longer that we've all had more time to find the hardships, I don't know but time will tell.
Is it FUD to say all this? Probably a little, but if we don't have any fear, uncertainty or doubt when taking on a new project then you probably haven't got any idea what you're getting yourself in to.
"Backbone.js is a great example of an abstraction pushed too far. While we initially liked the ease of wire-up, in practice it suffers from the same issues as all such data-bound frameworks from WebForms to client/server tools. We find that it blurs the framework and model too much, forcing either bad architectural decisions or elaborate framework hackery in order to preserve sanity.
As the industry shifted from desktop GUI development to the web, it seemed natural to port the most successful patterns and designs to the new paradigm. After 15 years of trying, we feel that there are still no component-based frameworks that have successfully achieved this. We recommend not attempting to make web development into something that it fundamentally is not. It is time to accept the page and request-based nature of the web, and focus on the frameworks that support - rather than work against - these concepts."
This is diametrically opposed to my experience, and I'm really surprised by the stance of ThoughtWorks on the matter. Hope I'm not doing a disservice by spreading the FUD. My belief is that most of the competing JavaScript frameworks are abstractions (and magic) pushed too far.
The main issue as I see it is that people choose a framework for a project in a short period of time and larger frameworks tend to take time before you see where they shine. I hear people's reason for going with Backbone because it was really the first major MVC out there and because of it's popularity. When I hear why people go with another framework it's because of features - not popularity.
Add on to this whenever I've talked to people or read blogs on systems made with other frameworks the majority of talks on backbone are how to solve problems they encountered while talks about larger frameworks are how to use new features and get more from your code. Maybe it's just because Backbone has been around longer that we've all had more time to find the hardships, I don't know but time will tell.
Is it FUD to say all this? Probably a little, but if we don't have any fear, uncertainty or doubt when taking on a new project then you probably haven't got any idea what you're getting yourself in to.