Anyhow, I do agree that my earlier statement was incorrect:

“In the absence of a binding framework, there is no way to notify the View of changes made to the View Model state.”

and have amended it to:

“In the absence of a binding framework, you have to manually ‘bind’ the view model to the UI, handling property and collection changes and updating the view accordingly.”

Colin E.

That’s the rub. Patterns are about, well, patterns. They have nothing at all to do with implementation details. You can implement a pattern however the heck you want to. Arguments that MVVM is a different pattern because of implementation details completely fail to understand what a programming pattern is!

Regardless, even if I were to agree to this definition of MVVM, the MVVM pattern still does not address visibility at all. Even with the implementation details of ICommand, INotifyPropertyChanged, DataContext inheritance, etc., there’s still no mention of which components are visible/dependent on other components.

As for which is simpler, MVVM or MVP, I was never trying to make such a judgement. However, I personally wouldn’t give up on MVVM just because I lacked a data binding framework, even if I were trying to keep the code simple. Just my humble opinion of course, and I’m not judging you for yours.

HTML5-cross platform apps are all about compromise. You mention that they don;t meet the needs of iOS users, they are even worse on atypical Android phone!

You should give MonoTouch a try, it wasn’t that hard to use.

You still haven;t made me change my mind about using MVP though!