You can use this MEBN
I think Angular is better than Backbone, personally I use mean.io, but...
Good points
Backbone can be integrated with many third-party template engines, the default choice is Underscore templates. Since Underscore is a Backbone dependency and you already have it on your page, you can easily take advantage of its templating engine without adding any additional dependencies for your application. On the downside, the templating engine of Underscore is very basic and you usually have to throw javascript into the mix, as you can see in our example:
Backbone is lightweight, fast and has a small memory footprint. The learning curve is very linear, and there are only a few simple concepts to grasp (Models/Collections, Views, Routes). It has great documentation, the code is simple and heavily documented, and there is even an annotated version of the code which explains how it works in detail. You can actually go over the entire source code of the framework and get familiar with it in less than an hour.
Being so small and basic, Backbone can be a good foundation to build your own framework upon. Some examples of 3rd party frameworks based on Backbone are Aura, Backbone UI, Chaplin, Geppetto, Marionette, LayoutManager, Thorax, Vertebrae. With Angular and Ember you usually have to live with the choices made by the authors of the frameworks, which may or may not suit your project needs and personal style. Angular 2.0 promises to change it, by comprising small independent modules, so you will be able to pick and mix. We are yet to see if they will be able to deliver this.
Pain Points
Backbone does not provide structure. It rather provides some basic tools you can use to create structure, leaving it up to the developer to decide how to structure his application, and there are also many blanks to fill. Things such as memory management have to be carefully considered. The lack of view lifecycle management makes route/state changes prone to memory leaks unless you take care of cleaning up everything yourself.
While it is true that many of the functions not provided by Backbone itself could be filled by third-party plugins, this also means that there are many choices to be made when creating an application, as many functions have several alternative plugins. For example, nested models can be provided by Backbone.DocumentModel, BackBone.NestedTypes, Backbone.Schema, Backbone-Nested, backbone-nestify, just to name a few. Deciding which one is the best for your project requires research, which in turn takes time — and one of the main purposes of framework is to save you time.
Backbone lacks support for two-way data binding, meaning you will have to write a lot of boilerplate to update the view whenever your model changes, and to update your model whenever the view changes. See the example given above, showing how two-way in Angular.js data binding reduces boilerplate.
Views in Backbone manipulate the DOM directly, making them really hard to unit-test, more fragile and less reusable. The common practice is to look up DOM elements using CSS selectors, so changing a CSS class name, adding a new element with the same class name or even wrapping some DOM tree inside another element can break your CSS selectors and render your app usable.
