Not a bad article, but the frameworks are incredibly similar, which meant every section boiled down to "Spine does it like this and so does Backbone". And the

Not a bad article, but the frameworks are incredibly similar, which meant every section boiled down to "Spine does it like this and so does Backbone". And the eventual conclusion didn't really highlight any meaningful difference between the two. From the conclusion: "...when the key thing is simplicity, file size or CoffeeScript integration choose Spine. In most other cases [use] Backbone." Simplicity, however, is highly subjective, and certainly from reading the article I saw no clear differences. As for Coffeescript integration, as anyone who's tried will attest, Backbone integrates perfectly with Coffeescript. And finally, the articles treatment of file size was deeply confusing as to which was actually smaller but at worst the difference is only a couple of kb. In short, there's really not a lot of difference here, which makes it all a bit pointless, I fear.