title: Why is .Net MVC architecture so overcomplicated vs Rails?
body: <p><em>Note: This is far from a post on x is better than x. Pleased dont go there.</em></p>
  
  <p>I'm a .Net guy and always have been, I've used the MVC framework since early version 2 Betas and every version since. Over the past few months I've been messing around with Rails and I have a question about architecture that seems to differ hugely between the 2 platforms. (Based on the community and questions on sites such as SO)</p>
  
  <p>In .Net MVC we are encouraged to separate concerns, create separate projects to handle Data Access, Business Logic and the View, we are also told that we should convert our Data objects to ViewModels before they hit the view etc</p>
  
  <p>In Rails, things seem allot simpler, we have an object that contains Validation, DataAccess (Via active record) and other logical properties and we simply ship that to the View and display it. </p>
  
  <p>So why in one framework is this methodology acceptable and in the other it's deemed wrong and we all end up writing more code and creating more files.</p>
  
  <p>Note : I'm no Rails expert and I really am not trying to compare which is better than x, I am looking at the high level architecture of the 2 frameworks and working out what it's acceptable in one but not the other. </p>