chanson

These guys seem to think they've invented this stuff. Scoble came out with some crap along these same lines after talking with the Avalon guys and after seeing a demo in which a guy wrote no code... http://radio.weblogs.com/0001011/2004/01/21.html#a6313 Imagine that!
He's written about this a couple of times: here (http://supertart.com/personal/blog/archives.html#note_113) and here (http://redsoxnation.blogthing.com/2005/01/14/microsoft-still-just-doesnt-get-it/) (my comments on them, anyway, with links).
Oh, if only we had tools for building web applications quickly and easily, with access to databases and everything!

Looks like they've reimplemented bindings, but done so poorly, and renamed it. Does that about sum it up?

Initially, I assumed you must be a Smalltalk guy but I see you're an Apple guy.

Well, I did learn object-oriented programming from Smalltalk (QKS SmalltalkAgents). I learned object-oriented design from the Gang of Four, Metrowerks PowerPlant, and OpenStep though — and I've found Cocoa (OpenStep's direct descendant) to be the best and most practical implementation of an MVC object-oriented framework to date.

While there's a lot in Microsoft .NET and Java, the Cocoa and WebObjects frameworks are simply better for what they do.

Now, I don't have real practical experience using Cocoa, but from what I have read in the documentation regarding the "MVC" that is recommended, it seems that it's just a mismatching of terms. The architecture that is called MVC in Cocoa, is not similar to the original Smalltalk MVC. Especially the role of the controller is different. In my opinion, the controller in Cocoa MVC takes on a role that is more like a presenter in MVP. The M/V/VM pattern is in essence a variant of the MVP pattern, which, in my opinion, the Cocoa MVC also is.