For many web developers, Bootstrap is the way to go when you have to create a Website or App. But in the five years I have making websites, I have ...
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
It always depends what you want to do. I agree that for a simple web-page there's no need for bootstrap. But there's life after, for those who don't get stuck in developing basic stuff. E.g. we're developing enterprise apps for airlines - revenue management, pricing, inventory management, etc. Your're not going to do that with a simple table but require some solid templates and components. And that's what bootstrap is for.
A contract value of those prices does not normally come with its own customized templates? It seems weird they would shell out that kind of money and immediately accept that performance hit.
I checked out a couple air line home pages to see:
AA: Modernize/jQuery
Delta: Just Bootstrap.js
United: React (without css framework that I could find)
In my experience, big contracts and companies often require documented and standardized solutions so the project can be maintained, improved, and fixed easily at any point in its lifetime. No one knows how long a software project will be around, and they know you won't be around forever (they don't want you to, as that would mean spending more money). There is of course a considerable amount of customized work to be done, but using public or private/paid solutions that are easily available and that anyone can pick up is a common practice.
Is it possible to use bootstrap to develop Project management application?
I've built dashboards with bootstrap framework. Overall - it's just a framework. It'll help you lay out your components, and using the utility classes are helpful for a lot of the visual elements in common Project Management software.
If the bottleneck was CSS file size (which it rarely is on the projects I've built), It would be difficult to refactor the project out of bootstrap because of how dependent a lot of the code is on bootstrap. But that's not a con -- it was a fast deployment VS many many more work hours to find all the right visual libraries to display data.
I don’t see how not?
One positive about bootstrap is that if another developer needs to modify your code they can understand bootstrap faster than working on custom components since it's got well established rules and docs
Hello Codedgar;
I've been using lightweight CSS frameworks because I needed the column system they had, discovering Flexbox Grid framework in this article was fantastic!
In the other hand I agree with you... Mostly. Actually I do hate Bootstrap! And it makes me so sad and angry that everyone is teaching Bootstrap to junior programmers as if it was the only way. The only thing I disagree with is that Bootstrap it's "good for fast prototyping".
There are many more frameworks out there designed to prototype easy and faster, such as Bulma CSS, Materialize and even Tailwind (this last one is about utilities but it's escalating so good).
I think those using Bootstrap nowadays probably don't want to try other frameworks or either they can't switch because their projects were built with it from scratch.
Really nice article!
Whena coder criticize Bootstrap to suggest Materialize, I stop to read 🙄
Both are frameworks with opinionated designs.
Sorry Silvan, but that makes no sense.
First of all I'm not a coder, I'm a fullstack so I also do design, and when I'm forced to use the guides of Google Material to design a product then of course I'll be also forced to use Materialize, and actually its easier than bootstrap.
In another hand, I've suggested 2 more frameworks really easy and fast to use and prototype which are very extended and useful.
fIrST oF iM NOt a cODeR, iM a fULLsTaCK
...Excuse me?
A fullstack is a coder that programs frontend and backend, hence the term. For you to say you're not a coder means you're ignorant of what a fullstack developer does, yet you say it's your profession. Hence, we mock.
I think that's a little obtuse, @satougg4
To some "coder" carries a tone of derision, or it's seen as reductive- Since it only conveys a small facet of what a developer does.
Personally, I often see it used/misused by people who overestimate their depth of expertise, so for me, it's a red flag.
It's obtuse to assume that because someone wants to clarify that their expertise is not just that "they write code", (but instead they work across a variety of architectures and design and implement systems) means they don't know that their job involves writing code
Read the guys article and figure out for yourself whether he knows what his job involves
Don't use Flexbox Grid framework. It is quick but dirty solution. Let me explain: Years ago people used html table element for page layout but for big projects you should have a separation of content and presentation. That means that for layout people should use CSS but for content HTML. So in your HTML you should have classes like content, article, form, legend, navigation, input, about, menu etc...but in CSS you should have a designer set the layout of those elements/classes by choosigin grid, flex, float or whatever it needs.
But with Flexbox Grid framework you are designing classes to have a predefined layout in HTML, instead of just having class="content" and let that content layout be defined in CSS. I get it, it is quick and convinient but it is wrong in a long run. When you want to change a layout you would need to changee html instead of just changing CSS file. It is not a good practice so we moved away from that a long time ago.
Yeah I've looked at bulma. I'm planning to use it in my personal projects. Seems easier to use than Boostrap.
It is, absolutely😉, and now it has lots of plugins that include javascript!
Bootstrap is best used as a framework from which you derive styles. It has a ton of utility features, but something that is big for me is that it is one of the few frameworks that has full-featured accessibility. I just don't have enough expertise to do all the work to make accessible styles on my own. It's easy to focus on the visual aspect of the design while forgetting accessibility. Bootstrap has some guard rails up to remind us.
So I usually end up customizing bootstrap by using the bootstrap SCSS library and preprocessing that with sassc. You can get it down to a few kb by excluding unused styles or by creating your own scss stylesheet.
And these are preprocessing steps that you do on your workstation while you're creating the design, so it works just fine with static HTML.
I totally agree.
With my personal experience, i always try to customize bootstrap as much as possible, for example: I use my own bootstrap.scss file, exclude all unnecessary components, and customize variable.scss to match with the design.
In doing so, i hardly need to use !important, which is the most should-avoid thing imo.
I'm totally gonna test Sass! Can you link a beginner tutorial so I can check it out?
You gotta be kidding, so you’ve never seen sass prior to writing this article?
I knew what it was, but I haven't used it since most of my work is pure HTML, CSS and JS without anything like NodeJS, React or VueJS so I haven't catch up with CSS preprocessors 🤷🏻♂️
I’d kindly suggest you to start using it, it is certainly a one way road.
Don’t think of it as something related to node frameworks. If you build front end, it is simply your right hand for writing, organizing and maintaining your CSS at the same time you speed up the development . You can even reuse your own partial definitions within your CSS project as many times as you want, make global variables.... etc. Also you will be able to split your files into components or pages (your choice) without using the CSS @import statement that, as you sure know, triggers new requests to the server, something that is not a very good practice from a page load optimization point of view. The fewer requests, the better.
Customizing bootstrap is something you’ll learn later, but building everything on pure CSS is not efficient for you, and you’ll end up crazy trying to maintain big projects.
Hope it helps :)
Thanks for the kind answer, I really appreciate it!
I will totally check it out and see how much I can improve my work with it, thanks again! 😄
First you'll want to install it. There are various implementations. I prefer the one written in C but only because it's the easiest for my environment. Then this guide will walk you through most of what you need to know.
The way I learned how to use SCSS was to reference that guide and then look at Bootstrap's variables and observe how they affected included styles in bootstrap.scss. You'll notice in bootstrap.scss you can comment out the imports you don't need.
There's an extension for visual studio code called Live SASS compiler that does the trick and it's awfully simple to install.
As for a tutorial, the official site has great documentation and it's, I believe, the best place to start.
Learn about how to use SASS to extend bootstrap instead of just dropping it due to size. It’s become a really infamous framework due to being abused by beginners, but it’s great if you learn how to use it properly.
I think the point Codedgar was making is that Bootstrap has become a golden hammer. Sometime we allow a tool to become more than it needs to be. Tool developers do this by adding more and more features. User developers do this by using a given tool as an article of faith instead of a intentional decision. 500k overhead for a landing page is a lot!
That is true. And it has become very infamous among some developers for that reason. However, as I mentioned in another post, you can use sass (which Bootstrap 4 was made with), to manually include components/features that you want (e.g bootstrap-grid). It's extremely easy to customize to your likings through variable or class overrides.
Also, Bootstrap isn't just a tool-- it's a framework, so naturally it will have a lot of features (but again, you can opt-out if you'd like less KBs).
Absolutely, you should understand what CSS is before using Bootstrap. But the points brought up in this article are misleading:
This is exactly what I thought when reading the article, misleading and ill-advised. Bootstrap has been designed and built to address all of the points raised, allowing users to pick and choose, customize and override, flexibility at heart. I could possible argue that it can feel a bit dated at times, and there can be classes that you do not use, but the only way to avoid this, as with any Framework, is to build your own to match your specific needs.
But the biggest negative I find in using any prebuilt framework, is that once its in place in its hard to replace it. Investing time at the start of a project to assess whether or not the framework meets your needs (and future needs) is time well spent.
In my next projects that use React, I will need to consider about using these libraries : React-Bootstrap, Antd or Material UI. Maybe a combination of them, depending on certain features that will fit to my needs. In my current app, Bootstrap dominates, although there are already some parts I write using Antd or Material UI.
This is nonsense. Why are you including styles you are going to override? If you're using Bootstrap for its Grid Layout then just use a framework that only does that.
People think if the payload is small then there's no issue, but your browser still has to parse all those unused styles.
Here are Bootstrap Sass mixins to use gist.github.com/anschaef/d7552885c... and here is a nice article how to use them: medium.com/@erik_flowers/how-youve...
"You also don't have to use jQuery. It's completely optional at the expense that you won't be able to use JavaScript based features such as modals, dropdowns, scrollspys, etc."
When I want to control my modal behaviour, I am forced to use jQuery. because using the attribute of data-toggle doesn't work exactly as I expected. I use modal forms massively, because there are a lot of forms in my app.
For my React based project, there are other alternatives for GUI toolkit other than Bootstrap (React-Bootstrap) such as Antd and Material UI. Currently I use Antd for closable dynamically added tab components; I use Material UI for switch components. The remaining parts are built using Bootstrap.
My app is quite large; it is about KPI management system that I develop alone : from front end to back end. So I don't have enough time to do refinement on the GUI.
If you're using CPanel to develop a website, using Bootstrap is least of your concerns. Most likely, your on a slow host with tons of resources and network speed issues.
jQuery is going away in Bootstrap 5, most CDN already have bootstrap cached for quick download.
If you enjoy fixing CSS compatibility bugs in multiple browsers than by all means roll your own CSS.
Getting new developers to learn "your css" is a waste of time, when most devs already know Bootstrap. So your team productivity will continue to suffer. If they extend your home-grown CSS, the code will just become a horrible mess.
Unless you're a lone ranger dev, using Bootstrap is not a big deal. In fact not using it, is unwise.
Sounds like you've been loading the full compiled CSS file and then overwriting the styles?
Why don't you use it with sass? It has a huge list of variables you can override to change the output and you can easily remove the parts you don't want to use.
If you use it like that then you hardly have to write any CSS at all and get consistent styling when you decide you want to use another part of it later.
From what I know you can not use Sass on a pure HTML project :o
Please do research on what you’re writing about before misleading a ton of people... If you go to the official bootstrap documentation, you’ll see that it has an “extending bootstrap” section. You can use sass to only bring in features/components that you need. With this, you can also override variables, so you don’t have to use “important!”. You also don’t have to use jquery, only if you want to use the JavaScript features such as modals or dropdowns.
My opinions come from 4 years doing websites! And while I agree on the sass part, you need to use jQuery and Bootstrap.js if you want to use the navbar or pretty much anything you want to have a functionality implemented in Bootstrap, so not having it would cut a lot of components out
You can choose to not import those components (which by the way, aren't that many) or just don't use them when you haven't added jQuery and bootstrap.js. You can also choose to add custom JavaScript (or use another library) and just use that.
Navbar also works perfectly fine without, you just can't use features such as dropdown for hamburger/profile menu, etc.
4 years is a long time without having looked at SASS, which is taken for granted that you know of if you do front end web development.
I'm not sure what you mean?
SASS is a pre-processor designed to make css easier to write and manage. It compiles sass files to css.
That's why Bootstrap uses it, you can change everything by overriding the variables.
Script kiddie go back to your lessons
I've never really liked bootstrap from the start. Sure, it's quick to use and all, but overall I've never considered it important or needed either.
In that sense, it's quite annoying, how so many people quickly grab bootstrap, and go on believing they've done the part (frontend).
Very nice article, happy to know am not alone anymore.😅😅
Same here. I worked for an agency once that was fired because they didn't use bootstrap! The client claimed the site couldn't be responsive without it even though we had build client adaptive mobile styling into the custom front end before this conversation even happened.
The problem with frameworks in the industry is that it's driven by marketing either to get the name of an existing tech company into the OSS space or with the hope that a buyout will happen. This leads to the wrong decisions happening when the people choose the tech stack based on hype -- not experience and requirements.
I've had to fight bootstrap layout styles on too many projects in the past 5 years to recommend it to anyone. It was built on naive best-practices from 10 years ago that lead to overly specific selectors and often require !important overrides. If I were releasing bootstrap today, I'd call it '!important'.
Then use sass, and bring in only features/components that you need such as the grid??
And have negative margins? No thanks. Bourbon and neat were better tools for this, but these days I just write it by hand. Flex box and css grid are supported well enough to not need this anymore anyway. I've used bootstrap mixins from sass for media queries in the past, but was unhappy with the lack of flexibility. Building at responsive (instead of adaptive), every design calls for breakpoints at different queries. As widely used as bootstrap is, css is used by nearly all websites and if developers can't support it that's on them ;)
Again, everything is customizable. Even the breakpoints. It’s just a matter of overriding the variables.
That's great! I've been doing my own CSS stuff for I dont know how long and the one thing I've seen the most when people find bootstrap/materialize is that they never learn to understand HOW it actually works. Getting some basic knowledge about CSS will help you in the long run!
To be fair, bootstrap 4 was not designed to be used on it's own. It is built with SASS to allow you to only use components you need. JavaScript has advanced far enough that you do not need jQuery to work with the CSS framework.
Agreed. Author is just misleading a ton of people, and making claims on a topic it doesn’t really seem like they understand.
For a native Frontend Developer that uses straight-up HTML/JS/CSS or for small projects, you may have some valid points there.
But for a Frontend JS Developer that uses modern Frameworks such as VueJs, React and Angular those points given are no longer a "caveat".
Especially for a full stack developer, time constraint is one factor that determine whether to use libraries/frameworks or not.
I use React as well as several libraries for data entry, data visualization (charts, gauges) for dashboard and reporting (currently only PDF format). For backend, I use PHP + Laravel, and mySQL for database.
So I cannot spend much time to create GUI from scratch using only HTML and CSS. There are so many other things that need my attention in order that my app run as expected.
Totally right! I'm a native frontend developer 😄
Given the CDNs available worldwide and intelligent caching done by web engines plus
the amount of memory available to most browser for cache,
I find your point #1 irrelevant. If JS libraries would comply with the Google compiler,
that size could be reduced, the compiler can identify unused code and remove it from the
compilation target. For now it's cheaper for lib maintainers to not jump on that train.
2) Yes and no. The day you need a component and it's not readily available,
you have to jump in some hack to implement it or import it.
Basing your decision on 'I will never need these' is
a short term decision that may come back and bite you.
The only real 'no' here is that you might have to dig to use a component
you don't use often or never used.
Is this worse than hacking something in your shed ?
I don't think so.
3) See 2)....
Amazing answer :o
And I agree on you on the main part. But in point 2 I have to say that yes! I prefer making my own things!
This helps me create a component that can match the look and feel of the website completely instead of having to customize an already existing element. And maybe add little details that are not present on Bootstrap.
Some people may say that creating my own components for websites it's not optimal, but that's why I said "I" on the title 😄
In the context of executing a contract for a customer, you cannot let that happen.
It's already hard to do a decent knowledge transfer, anything out there that is already published
and maintained should be used as much as possible.
I used to like to do my own things in assembler. But it was a different era and because of
limited hardware at the time it was on many occasions a 'logical' choice,
I remember though a customer that refused to buy a C compiler (5k CAD at the time)
for a distributed transactional system.
I ended up coding 40k lines of assembler (and I used macros extensively). 😬
Not a good business decision. This ran for more than 3 years w/o failing before being replaced
by a better business decision.
I and you are not eternal albeit you may have more time left than me (58 here).
I have used bootstrap for many years. I recently started using React, so now I use react-boostrap. Its great as it allows you to load only the components you need, plus it allows for server side rendering which is ultimately what I was looking for.
Have you tried Antd and Material UI for creating GUI with React ?
When I needed a Switch component that had to be a controlled component, I found that only the one of Material UI that ran as expected.
I use Antd for its Tab component, because it provides example on closable dynamic tabs which I need. React-Bootstrap doesn't provide guide on how to do it. But if I only need static tabs, it is sufficient. So in my app, I use these different libraries to create certain features.
Yes we originally used Material UI but I wanted to use a bootstrap library so react-bootstrap was ideal. I am using third party libraries for tabs and for datatables. After a lot of trial and error, this seems to be the best set up for us (so far!)
react-bootstrap.netlify.com/
github.com/jbetancur/react-data-ta...
github.com/YazanAabeed/react-tabs
React-Bootstrap is nice. I will probably use it in my next projects.
For datagrid/table, my requirement is the lib has to provide features as follows :
For these features, I find two free libraries that I use in my app :
As for tabs, I think you may want to consider other libs. The lib you mention only has one contributor, so for me, it is doubtful to be used.
You may try the following :
github.com/reactjs/react-tabs
Furthermore, in case you have never known, there is a site that has a collection of various kinds of React libraries :
github.com/brillout/awesome-react-...
I totally agree, I wish people would stop using it personally. I see devs using it as a crutch so they do t have to actually learn how anything works or how to do things properly from scratch. I would argue most devs that praise it probably have no real understanding of CSS.
The opposite is also true, newly formed coders who are producing cheap websites working on their Safari or Google chrome, incompatibles with the other browsers with totally un-maintainable code.
Wow! Great post. I'm an Intern and love styling everything from scratch. But here is why I didn't like my last bootstrap experience. My boss asked me to copy an existing landing page that was built in WordPress. He asked me to use BS, "ok cool!". All of the required files to build the page were images that were pre Designed by a graphic designer (I'm sure my boss was testing me) so at the end of the day (2 days) I had built a nice landing page that WASN'T exactly the same as the example, and there was absolutely no way to make it exact due to BS conventions. It got very close, and the boss loved it. But the frustrating part of the project was 1) I ended up with a fairly hefty CSS page with separate and intricate responsive stylings and 2) that type of thing should have only taken me 3 hours at the most. I know that BS is designed for speed and quick prototyping and it was unfortunate that I had to work with images only. I didn't have complete control, and that bugged me.
I will have to agree that bootstrap might be unecessary and even unwanted for smaller project but I would argue also for big or very customized layouts or designs.
A rule of thumb could be that if you find yourself undoing most of the style structures that bootstrap gives you and you are constantly using !important keyword to get things done I think it is time to start considering your life without bootstap.
I would personally use bootstrap only if the job/client required it or if the project was already based on bootstrap and did not want to make a major overhaul. I would probably use a framework for columns/grid but even that is probably not needed.
I find it that in all cases plain old CSS (actually new CSS3) will give you all power and flexibility to create what you need to create exactly what you want to accomplish.
my 2c
A lot of projects I end up working with use Bootstrap in some form, just because it comes with a lot of WordPress themes. Personally though, I really like Tailwind.
One very useful thing to use, especially when I am using Webpack(or alternatives) is something like PurgeCSS. It basically just removes unused CSS.
One major advantage of CSS frameworks is that they make collaboration much easier. Plus marks for accessibility and responsiveness especially when time is a luxury while the major disadvantage would have to be that they often do much more than you need.
I saw PurgeCSS a lot of time ago too! I tried to use it but it removed a lot of CSS that wasn't supposed to be deleted, including media querys. I don't know if this was already fixed
Have used it before plenty of times without a problem. It could be down to the way you have it configured, as it's not a simple plug and play. You need to ensure you specify all your templates where you reference any CSS.
Well now days you can make customizations to bootstrap super straightforward without use important using the theming approach and import only what you need using sass check it out.
And if you are using framework like react and angular there are open source project that have bootstrap component work without jquery at all like: ngbootstrap and reactbootstrap .
I think there are good alternative. I hope you like.
So basically you are saying you're can't create a good design with bootstrap?
Sorry, but that's just...well, dumb.
I'm not saying you can't do good designs with Bootstrap (You totally can lol), what I'm trying to imply is the fact that if you are going to use Bootstrap and the design will force you to overwrite most of the styles of Bootstrap, you shouldn't use it.
Read the third part (Styling) to know what I mean better 😄
Your process and conclusion are very similar to my own. What made me abandon Bootstrap was how often I had to write incredibly specific overrides to get the results I wanted. My selectors got more and more specific and required more and more weight to inherit the styles the way I wanted. It also felt disingenuous to apply a generic style library to my client’s sites when my job was to create something custom tailored to their tastes and needs. All that just lead me to the conclusion that bootstrap was not saving me time or making my designs better: the two things it’s supposed to do.
I agree with the author. For someone like me, who focuses more on the code than the styling, Bootstrap was a godsend in the early days. But over time it got heavier, especially if you used another library to add material design on top of it. Recently I converted a web app from Bootstrap+MDBootstrap to Bulma. The JS bundle size was cut in half, as was the amount of HTML I had to write (and maintain in the future).
The issue I have with bootstrap is that it requires you to tailor your html to bootstrap, which seems a little back to front. The CSS should really be adapting the html.
Additionally, if you start needing to do anything outside the scope of bootstrap then you end up having to workaround any bootstrap assumptions.
Lovely Indeed the article is. I have been developing world class apps and software and would like to say If you are a Beginner / Non UX familiar / Front Desk Operator then bootstrap is for you.
If you know the Pixels and the Density and the Mobile / Desktop / Web works then write your own framework. Never depend on frameworks they close down in time. Write the Native language. So write your own framework, it could be done in few lines for world class products.
"And using Bootstrap means that you have to use also jQuery..." is a bit misleading. You only HAVE to use jQuery if you're going to use Bootstrap modals, dropdowns, etc. I do wish Bootstrap would come out with a tool like jQuery UI (jqueryui.com/download) that'll allow you to select which modules and pieces you want so the payload is much smaller and faster.
I think your concern with weight warrants a little exploration personally. There are a few different concerns bundled in that idea.
A very common one of course (albeit not the only concern) is the download cost. But it behooves us to note that using a very popular library and linking to it from a very popular source is popular precisely because it addresses this concern, engaging the strong likelihood that the library is already cached, by virtue of its ubiquity and popularity.
I like your post, but you're falling into the trap of talking about package sizes before gzipping. Bootstrap 4 is 20kb gzipped. That's the actual number of bytes that'll go over the wire to the client.
Well, from the productivity standpoint, writing your own hamburger menu's and making them all appear correctly on mobile, tablet and others...
Making the sidebars, dropdown components that work on mobile correctly, and all the other things that a simple app might need.
Rewriting these things instead of using the framework is almost the same as inventing the wheel all over again. I use Bulma, which is lighter and more opinionated than Bootstrap, doesn't provide atomic classes, and anything on that level of case-to-case usage. But it does provide modules that you won't use on a simple website.
Anything beyond a landing page requires an efficient developer to use a framework. Especially when you are working alone on the project, playing around with hamburger menus is just a plain waste of time.
I totally agree on everything you said! That's why I said that if you want to develop something fast you can totally use Bootstrap!
If i had to make something I'd never use bootstrap as the default styles imo are pretty ugly considering today's trends.
I also dislike flexbox grid for some of the same reasons I dislike flexbox. e.g. +100 divs and something you could easily write yourself and probably be more precise (assuming you know what you're doing)
tho flexbox grid is definetly the best of all the css frameworks I've seen.
Also, as far as compiling styles like you mentioned with nodejs. Very simply with react or similar tooling which compile things down to a static website, bootstrap would get the treatment you were talking about where unused styles aren't used in the compilation (iirc) however with react this thing exists react-bootstrap.github.io however thats a solution to a problem that didn't exist as I'm pretty sure most react devs would prefer to make their css with something like sass, less or css components.
A lot of things have changed now with Bootstrap 5 and my philosophy is: use only what you need. I do that with SASS directly, so Bootstrap always comes handy when I need to work fast. I know how to to it without Bootstrap, but why waste my time over and over again?
Leaving aside the purpose of the article, I'll disagree with you on item 3. Since BS 4.x and the adoption of SASS pre-processor the theming and customization issues turns it far more easy to deal with. The use of the !default flag for ALL available variables made it pretty easy to config for everyone needs. They still use jQuery for all the behaviors indeed but I think it's a matter of time to get rid of it.
I get where you're coming from. I'm with you... I don't like Bootstrap's bloat and always find an alternative/roll out my own.
But this post is so very highly opinionated so much that it can be misleading to make people think Bootstrap is BAD. It's a tool, like a hammer or a shovel. They both can dig a hole... only one is more painful than the other.
Choosing Bootstrap is often a project preference, not a personal one.
I've built quick landing pages and I've built giant enterprise front-ends. For quick landing pages, of course I'm going to avoid Bootstrap and roll out my own systems. But for enterprise software with multiple designers, I'm going to use bootstrap so we have a unified language to communicate with.
They're just tools. And this post is picking a side and creating division for no reason.
Yeah! I did my best to try and not come across like I hate Bootstrap and I think is the worst thing ever created. I agree on you on everything you said. There a lot of ways to do the same thing
I do agree with most of this post, and my support is mostly based on the fact that there are so many alternatives, and no single package is the best solution for all projects. It depends on your goals.
For those wishing to keep it ultra-lite, I recommend Tailwind CSS. It's very lite, and has a refreshing approach to actually avoid providing components, except those you factor out yourself when you use them more than once, components you'll provide yourself from really consistent and easy-to-use and learn CSS directives.
For those wanting a full-featured library of high-level components but one that can be reduced to only those you actually use, I recommend Vuetify (for CSS components), which makes use of Vue for a framework.
Hi codedgar
Bootstrap is a useful ui framework work but as you mention, bootstrap has so many components and utilites that when we install it we do not even use half of them and they will be there anyway
for building a simple web page or website it is not necessary to use it or when you want to build your own component or costume styling
But in my opinion bootstrap is a great framework for building large-scale applications and many famous app use bootstrap like udemy, and Spotify and Twitter
There is also the option to create a customized version of Bootstrap. It involves installing bootstrap with npm/yarn and editing the default Bootstrap scss to exclude whichever components you'd like.
See Klooven's answer for instructions at: stackoverflow.com/questions/457259...
From past experience, I found that most implementations of Bootstrap were very poor. Either, including the entire framework or abusing the framework with a skip full of overrides, additional (and in some cases multiple) themes, etc.
With Bootstrap Vue now readily available, the reliance on jQuery is absolute tosh.
The moral of the story here is to use the right tool for the job and use it correctly. Remember the saying "You don't use a sledgehammer to crack a walnut".
Admittedly, that's easier said than done.
I completely agree. There are lot of components what we are not using. Let's say example, we can use flex grid system and cards or sections, so why we just get the Flex Grid System with variables for responsiveness and type our own sass/css for Cards, Sections, Articles ...
it's not so bad to type 500 lines sass/css code for components only what we are using or at least borrow from bootstrap only that comps what you need.
I've also decided that personally I'll use bootstrap by default and become proficient at it, if the client wants a radically different look then I'll charge more for it since it takes more time to do custom and make it polished
So you roll all of your own components (which would be the #1 reason I would incorporate a 3rd party framework)? If so, you should publish your own framework.
For layout, why use a framework at all and just use native grid and/or flex?
I understand your points and mostly agree to it, but bootstrap also allows you to get a custom build which includes only the components you need to use.
Have you tried that? We can also use bootstrap without jquery and bootstrap.js, the js part is only used on some areas of the framework. For the Layout and other CSS only components, JS, Jquery is optional, you can also ignore the same in the custom build as well.
I am not arguing in favor of bootstrap, its heavy and we can do great looking websites without it, but it has options to overcome the issues you state with it.
You only have to download it once that's how browsers work. So yeah your landing page was 500k (if youve never been to a site with bootstrap content before) and then every click from there is seamlessly smooth. The files are cached on your client. Its literally more optimized than your alternative even if its just downloading a css file with 1 line in it that's more than 0. So by the rulebook of the overoptimizers: bootstrap is more optimized. Now what are you going to do or did your head already explode? You literally HAVE to reuse css and probably should use a popular framework. These are not my rules I find it silly and pointless you are the ones who count kb of file size and .00001 seconds matters to you people. Enjoy bootstrap.
Truth be told as I do more Angular and React I see more examples that use other CSS choices such as SASS, LESS and even Font Awesome. For example an Angular 4 multi select tool that I found very useful. So my app combined bootstrap with font awesome in that case. App level, template level and in-line level using lazy loading and ... well you get the picture. I seldom feel I have control over it anymore. I just assemble it all and hope the UI/UX looks good, is uniform and functional. I will agree that JQuery has some issues with browser tools such as Google auto fill. Newer scripting tools are building fixes that corrupt results when the tools clash. The JQuery are not keeping up. This is problematic in maintaining web sites that are older. JQuery was very good to me I should mention but users want their browser tools and not excuses when glitches occur.
As a coding newbie, we were required to build a project as a graduation requirement for the Bootcamp that I attended. The mentor(s) suggested using Bootstrap. I liked it but we were also required to complete a course in Treehouse. I enjoyed the Treehouse course because it also required that I learn about Flexbox Grid. :-)
Off topic but i snapped the pic used on the cover, totally was surprised to find it in the wild.
Holy hecc! Hahahaha Nice pic man it's amazing
The fact that you think this shows that you just don't know how to use Bootstrap efficiently.
You can pretty easily customize Bootstrap and import only what you need to use. I think it's gotten even better with version 5. I would recommend people reconsider it. It's also got TONS of utility classes, which I find helpful.
I've never used out of the box bootstrap because of all the reasons you mentioned. I use them because I like the css class naming conventions. It makes sense to me and I use it across all my custom css too. But I do use the scss and cherry pick the parts I need for a specific project. In my case it's almost always just resets and grids and navs. Variables make it so I'm not overwriting a bunch of their code and I get very non-bootstrap looking websites.
About the Weight part, it's worth to mention that you don't need a Node.js server to remove the unused CSS. This optimization can be done using tools and publishing the resulting assets.
I'm not really into frontend development, but for Laravel projects, we have a tool named Laravel Mix. This is a wrapper for Webpack.
And we have plugins like purgeCss that automatically removes the unused CSS and generate assets ready for production.
Using the SASS version of bootstrap makes it super customizable. Everything is done with variables, so you just override the variable. No important required.
You can build your own version of bootstrap. Don't need certain components? Don't add them to your build.
True about jQuery, and I wish it didn't need it, but alas.
I agree with the use of !important that I don't appreciate in Bootstrap. I remember I spent a lot of time trying to figure out why my custom CSS was not visible until I found that I had to overwrite Bootstrap style with that !important.
In the meantime, did you give Bulma a try?
I find this way of thinking critical for any developer, regardless if working with Frontend or Backend. You need to weigh your needs with what the library does and how much it carries that you don't need. Sometimes wanting to build something fast, people forget that it will eventually need to be maintained. Which means if you are only using a small portion of a library all the extras it carries can get in the way of maintenance.
Good read. Thank you. I just finish HTML and CSS about to embark on JS. But I heard a lot of bootstrap could open me more into CSS framework. I tend to agree with you, now i'm on bootstrap track, that If we need fast and rust front-end, bootstrap is the best approach. However, crafting by my hands would be event prouder! Thanks you looking for your next article about CSS grid. I think I like grid then flexbox.
Well I agree with you but what about CDN resources they are always in the Cache of many users that previously visited other website with the same version of bootstrap.
I also stopped using Bootstrap recently. It worked, but I also found that for the setup involved (personal projects, portfolio sites, etc) I wasn't using much of it.
I started using Bulma which feel much lighter and easier to use.
I think these frameworks add a layer of abstraction and encapsulate the inner workings which will be imperative if the developer would know what goes on under the hood. To have better understanding and control over their workflow rather than been opinionated about it. I agree to the fact that bootstrap and other frameworks are sometimes unnecessary especially for smaller apps, no need for unnecessary dependencies. But I also totally agree that when you need to get the job done faster you can go ahead and use it. But in addition to that you can create your own custom components and work with it when you want. But I think its more of a personal decision though, but as for me the projects I do now are intentionally customized and require me to have more control so I do alot of styling from scratch but I use sass preprocessor and the BEM design pattern.
I've used Bootstrap for years. I still think it's beneficial for rapid prototyping and just getting stuff done fast and efficient, Especially for just building a website. out of the box with minor tweaks you can have a website up and running way faster than having to build that everytime.
“But Bootstrap is less than 500KB"
Am I the only one who thinks 500KB is HUGE?
Bootstrap is the right tool, when you need to quickly create some kind of UI without the existing graphic design.
In all other cases it brings more problem than it solves.
The main and the most important problem with Bootstrap is a lot of global classes, which may cause unpredictable side effects.
Thanks for interesting writing, but there's a bit misleading here :-)
1 & 2 & 3. you dont have to use entire bootstrap. its highly modular and customizable.
for css all you need to do is get any sass app then just include bootstrap parts you need, and override bootstrap's variables.scss
for JS, you can exclude it entirely. Its optional. or you can just use required module. you can do this even without module bundler. using the old way script include.
eg: i only use grid, some utils & dropdown, and get small enough build for my page.
For Sass app, there's easy GUI like prepros or codekit. You dont need nodeJS or any fancy server stuff to customize bootstrap.
My opinion:
when you decide to ditch bootstrap by using other smaller framework or even write your own, thats good.
However consider with the project growing, you'll most likely write a lot of utilities or helpers that eventually makes your codebases mimics what bootstrap trying to solve (perhaps not as elegant).
Why not just use things that kinda standarized and well documented?
For learning, you can always see the source code and see how things work. even make your mini framework based of it.
Bootstrap is opinionated but still flexible enough for most of styling need. It just battle tested.
My biggest complaint of Bootstrap is its specificity battle. I am really good with CSS specificity but Bootstrap has tons of Gotchas waiting to stress a developer. Aside from Foundation I have not worked with a framework like either of these for this very reason.
I’ll be honest I am surprised when I see completed templates from developers who used Bootstrap. I can’t imagine the patience required. My fuse blows very fast after a few errors. 😂
I do have a remark about point 1: Bootstrap doesn't necessarily weigh 500KB - using their SASS system you can easily include only what you need, and get that 500KB (I wonder if it's really that much at all?) down to between 100 and 200KB.
By the way: Bootstrap 4 is smaller and more lightweight (and better designed, it uses CSS Flex) than Bootstrap 3. And yes for some components jQuery is needed but if you really don't want jQuery then there are replacements (there are also React and Vue versions of Bootstrap that don't use jQuery).
Regarding styling, I don't find Bootstrap that hard to style (override), maybe it's a difference between Bootstrap 3 and 4 ?
Codedgar for me the problem of write your own css from Scratch is when you work on project with a big team. Bootstrap solves this problem because anyone in the team will write equal code. And if during the project enter a new one this person isn't will have problens to understand de code and start on the project. With css from scratch this person will need time to understand and this take time. For projects that you work alone it's okay but for large global teams with different work time this could be terrible. Thats the reason of I still prefer work with frameworks like Bootstrap.
Totally agree with your points. I was a very heavy user of bootstrap into a point that I couldn't start a project with anything else. It was easy to use, I was used to the class and it could make a kind of beautiful design without much effort for my non-design skills. However, worrying more and more about page speed, size and not used components - specially my hatred against JS - it made me to rethink if I really should start projects with bootstrap (or even other frameworks). The one you said seems interesting for the size and probably would cover 90% of my needs wich is dealing with grids and responsiveness. For my latest project I tried bulma and fell in love too. It covers pretty much all the components I needed for this project and for the rest 10~20% I just didn't include their sass files (still bothered me that I had unused classes tho). And the best part is: no embedded JS which, for me, is the worst outcome of the end of this decade! It allowed me to have a quite nice design, easy to build, easy to customise and a very very thin layer of javascript just to make some elements clickable and some dynamic content that the project required. I hope for this new decade the frontend community understand the monsters we are creating with tons of (not used) javascript that are being transferred over the wire and slowing down and overall user experience as every webapp and website nowaday come with tons of JS (components, tracking, ads, etc etc)
Thanks for sharing your ideas.
I think your example is too simple, Bootstrap is used for bigger projects.
Btw personally prefer a framework that has many features but able to treeshake it easily (for enterprise applications)
Ha ha I totally understand !
I really think that if you can, you should try to get rid of bootstrap.
Myself, I can't not use a framework, I have to check on the work of many developpers who don't like or understand css very well, and having them following bootstrap guidelines is kind of mandatory. Also I don't like Material 😅
Thanks anyway for the thoughts.
I ran into many an issue trying to implement bootstrap into an ancient app.
Ended up using bulma, worry about out of date jquery later.
I usually just use the bootstrap reset and grid, but as someone said earlier with sass you can pick which components you want and then to further strip it out you can use purgecss or something like it when compiling everything. I would highly recommend using the sass version over loading in the basic compiled css. You can also override a lot of settings by using it. You can make bootstrap exactly what you need and I would say you should do this with all frameworks. There is also Bootstrap Native that uses vanilla JS with no need of jQuery.
hi,I agree with you bootstrap is just Flex and column and row, why we should use it?
I don’t use frameworks, I design a responsive css with less than 10 lines and js with 15 lines.
Great writing style👍
Thanks! My main language is not English so this means a lot to me! 🐈
thanks for the Flexbox Grid library!
I was thinking the same. Too many unused components, some which don't look appealing any longer. Too much CSS and jQuery-Javascript. Too many classes for stuff you will never use ... Hundreds of grid utility classes "w-100 d-none d-md-block offset-md-3", when it's simpler and more intuitive to create your own grid with flex or modern grid css. After a stint with Bulma, I found myself back with Bootstrap using a few select CSS components via SCSS. I like their forms/buttons/groups css and a few other components that I don't want to re-create from scratch. I don't want the bootstrap Javascript/jQuery, as it can easily be replaced by native Javascript or CSS-only, at least for many components. With Bootstrap 5, at least they are getting rid of jQuery ... But I feel the project has lost it's head slightly, and some component designs are still based on Bootstrap 3.
I use bulma.io/
It is built with flexboxes and you can customize which components you want.
Have you tried Foundation? What do you think of it?
Coincidentally, I just made my first Flexbox Grid layout a few days ago an I really like it.
If you just use the grid part with sass then add as if/ when, then I don’t see why you wouldn’t.
Hi, I'm from the future, come here to recommend you a nice, fast and customizable CSS Framework called Tailwind CSS
Weight Flexbox Grid 12Kb
I use Foundation Zurb - Grid. I don't use Bootstrap.
I dumped Bootstrap too in favor of UIKit.
How about only using bootstrap-grid it's about 50 KB?
Nowadays I don't use bootstrap either. For most of the websites I use Bulma. It is actually awesome in size, components, and responsiveness.
lol just you don't use it, don't say all of us
I wouldn't say nobody, most of the websites, templates and WordPress themes that I've seen use Bootstrap components and override them
Regarding your point about overriding bootstrap.
The key is to override the less files and compile your own style. With that your can leverage just what you need
I hope that bootstrap-like frameworks can be more modular and load only the parts I need.like require module?
Bootstrap does provide way for importing components individually, using ES6 import syntax such as :
import 'bootstrap/js/dist/button';
import 'bootstrap/js/dist/alert';
import 'bootstrap/js/dist/modal';
If we use React, there are good alternatives for GUI toolkit beside React-Bootstrap in which we can import only components that we will be using :
The components are imported using ES6 module syntax instead of requirejs syntax.
In my current app, I use Bootstrap for most parts, use Antd for its dynamic Tabs component, and Material UI for its Switch component.
The reason I mostly use Bootstrap (React-Bootstrap or Reactstrap) is because it is the 1st library that I knew when I started developing my app.
Bootstrap can evolve if it can develop a CSS framework for web components. I was hoping to create a PR for such
I’m a backend developer but the reasons exposed in this article makes sense to me.
frameworks kill design