But Bootstrap has a much bigger community so there is more support and features/plugins because of this.
Pros (the speakers) were saying Bootstrap wasn't really inherently responsive/mobile and it made sites all look the same (though if you change its styles, doesn't it fix that?), even calling Bootstrap worse and to go with Foundation. But then I heard about Zurb Foundation from a conference I went to. All I had known prior was that Twitter Bootstrap was what everyone was using and I was about to go with that. I've been finding myself building entire pages without writing a single line of css.Īnd if later on, the designer wants to make a change to some color, or size, I just need to change one value in the config file, and the entire app is updated.I've looked into both of these and I'm just not sure which to go with. If you go with pure css and build your own components, I can't recommend tailwind enough, If you choose options one, then it's just a matter of deciding what style you like (material,ant, bulma) and go with the library that implements it Might take time to get used to and takes more time since you need to build the components Most flexible, mix and match classes as you like and build your own markup Takes more time since you need to build the components You are bound to Bulma classes and markup. Need to learn the react framework and the bulma styles, and it's harder to customize to your needsĪ pure css framework, like Bulma, where you write all the components yourself.Ī lot of flexibility to build the components you need Having a lot of pre-built UI components saves a lot of time Bootstrap has a broader approval, being mentioned in 7046 company stacks & 1115 developers stacks compared to Foundation, which is listed in 653 company stacks and 77 developer stacks.Īctually it really depends on your needs, there are 3 types of UI frameworks you can use: Spotify, Twitter, and Lyft are some of the popular companies that use Bootstrap, whereas Foundation is used by HotelTonight, StatSheet, and Customer.io. It seems that Bootstrap with 134K GitHub stars and 66K forks on GitHub has more adoption than Foundation with 28.2K GitHub stars and 5.77K GitHub forks. "Responsiveness", "UI components" and "Consistent" are the key factors why developers consider Bootstrap whereas "Responsive grid", "Mobile first" and "Open source" are the primary reasons why Foundation is favored.īootstrap and Foundation are both open source tools.
FOUNDATION FRAMER VS BOOTSTRAP BUILDER FULL
Full of features: With Bootstrap, you get extensive and beautiful documentation for common HTML elements, dozens of custom HTML and CSS components, and awesome jQuery plugins.
FOUNDATION FRAMER VS BOOTSTRAP BUILDER CODE
One framework, every device: Bootstrap easily and efficiently scales your websites and applications with a single code base, from phones to tablets to desktops with CSS media queries.Quickly get started with precompiled CSS or build on the source. Preprocessors: Bootstrap ships with vanilla CSS, but its source code utilizes the two most popular CSS preprocessors, Less and Sass.Some of the features offered by Bootstrap are: You can quickly prototype and build sites or apps that work on any kind of device with Foundation, which includes layout constructs (like a fully responsive grid), elements and best practices.īootstrap and Foundation can be primarily classified as "Front-End Frameworks" tools. Foundation is the most advanced responsive front-end framework in the world. Bootstrap is the most popular HTML, CSS, and JS framework for developing responsive, mobile first projects on the web Foundation: The most advanced responsive front-end framework in the world. Bootstrap vs Foundation: What are the differences?īootstrap: Simple and flexible HTML, CSS, and JS for popular UI components and interactions.
0 kommentar(er)
