>>>>Why do you think this?
>>>
>>>Because I can build an ASP.NET app easily and quickly w/o screwing around with views and controllers.
>>>
>>>I went through all of Pluralsight's videos on MVC along with digging through reams of mostly irrelevant internet crap while trying to get my MVC skill up enough to pass my .NET 4 Developing Web Applications cert. I hope I don't have to deal with it again (of course, now there's MVVM...).
>>
>>I wasn't aware that MVVM was relevant outside of Silverlight and WPF.
>
>We were discussing this the other day. It's certainly true that MVVM focuses on, and works best with, WPF/Silverlight applications.
>But a big reason for implementing any design pattern of this type should be that the equivalent of the VM layer be completely UI agnostic. So if it is argued that MVVM cannot be used effectiviely with Winforms or web apps or phone apps then it loses a chunk of its rasion d'etre?
>
>TBH I've not tried (or even thought about trying) using our existing VM's against Winforms or in a ASP.NET role (outside of Silverlight) so, although I realize it would certainly not be as easy, I don't know what the real friction points would be.
>
>Just my 10c, be interested in other opinions.....

I think that certain patterns fit certain technologies better. For example, MVVM makes data binding a breeze and helps with the intricacies of Silverlight. MVC makes client-side technologies very easy to use - no so much the architecture itself but the available functionality out of the box.

Is it really realistic to expect to only use one pattern?