Juan Vuletich wrote:
> It seems I wasn't clear (again). It is not that I don't want to discuss 
> these items with you. What happens is that Andreas says strong and 
> polemic opnions. I actually started to write all the things I don't 
> agree with in that interview. But I don't think that would be polite. 
> Perhaps if Andreas asked for other's opinions on his words...

Sure, go for it ;-)

> It is enough for me to say that Morphic is great for building 
> abstractions, allows separation of view and model (but does not enforce 
> it), and I don't see any need for a different architecture.

I'm curious how you come to this conclusion. In particular considering 
that Morphic has no theory of viewing (the Pluggable* classes for 
example were added as an afterthought to support apps written for MVC 
and have nothing to do with what I would consider a "true Morphic app").

Cheers,
   - Andreas