The only thing Spine seems to have really tackled is "Collection/Model synchronization" which in my opinion should have just been built as an extension to backb

The only thing Spine seems to have really tackled is "Collection/Model synchronization" which in my opinion should have just been built as an extension to backbone. Copying the website element for element and 90% of the design paradigm from backbone.js would have been semi-acceptable to me if the author elaborated more on the comparison between backbone in his FAQ. "Lastly, Spine is much simpler and half the size, go and check out the source." "Much simpler" seems like a huge call to make and it has been nice to see Jeremy refute all claims by spine.js thus far. Edit: Also I don't think Backbone.js should receive any negative points for naming conventions. MVC has such a diluted definition that it barely matters how a framework chooses to implement it.