Forums

Give help. Get help.

  • # August 8, 2013 at 3:04 am

    Hello I am doing some research for finding out the best frame work to use for responsive website. For my self. Currently I am playing around with bootstrap 3 but I have noticed that interferes with some of the custom styles I have chosen. Foundation 4 does seem easier but need to make up mind.

    If can have a few reviews on what is best to use would be great. I have been doing some google searching and they say foundation for is not so heavy.

    Bootstrap does have good features though.

    # August 8, 2013 at 8:40 am

    @deeve007 I just use them because I still have trouble making responsive wesbite and not well at making own custom grid yet.

    # August 9, 2013 at 2:30 am

    @deeve007

    I am now starting on learning how to make my own grid system ones got a light weight version like you said but just studying that how it operates and then customizing my own grid system to way I want.

    thanks for tip and advice

    # August 9, 2013 at 10:50 am

    I agree with deeve07, although frameworks are very helpful for quick, future-proof and responsive development, it takes away from the fundamentals and too often becomes bloated.

    (This is just from my experience, I am not stating that I’m an expert in frameworks)

    But to reiterate, from using foundations and bootstrap, I have noticed more community driven help to bootstrap. There are more themes available that work well with bootstrap, and from what I know CMS have bootstrap support (the open source one’s I’ve checked out)

    I personally use bootstrap, but I would love to venture into rolling my own framework to be less dependent.

    I hope this sheds more light.

    Robert

    MS
    # August 21, 2013 at 11:52 pm

    I personally disagree about looking for alternatives

    Foundation and Bootstrap are the leaders on this field with strong and continuous support.

    the ability to customize the download file to what you need is the best answer for who is saying they are bloated with a lot of features.

    Which one is better is hard question and its up to the developer to find what suited him better, since both of them are very similar and they keep trying to steal features from each other, so they are almost same.

    The slightly differences which i found

    Bootstrap:
    – Has more features
    – More followers and stronger support
    – bootstrap 4 is newer!!

    On the other hand i found Foundation is lighter

    Its good to mention that which CSS preprocessor you are using is the best thing to determine which one to choose

    Less -> Bootstrap
    SASS -> Foundation

    # August 22, 2013 at 2:47 am

    I am not using grids any more to much trouble I am making website mobile first now.

    MS
    # August 23, 2013 at 3:11 am

    Well, Deeve007

    the post is about choosing Foundation vs Bootstrap and you try to talk about ignore them!!

    i think its better to talk here about something usefull regarding the main topic

    # August 29, 2013 at 2:57 pm

    I’m going to go ahead and second Bootstrap. I’m impressed with the amount of work that has gone into Bootstrap and I have faith that it will only get better. I haven’t done a deep dive into Bootstrap 3.0 yet, but it seems like there were some pretty serious improvements over the previous version. Ultimately, I think it comes down to what your requirements are.

    # August 29, 2013 at 3:49 pm

    May I suggest Skeleton as an alternative. Skeleton mainly concentrates on the grid system . It is small, and much less bloated than foundation or bootstrap. A great alternative if you just want to use an external grid system.

    # September 12, 2013 at 8:35 am

    The ability to customise your package for the likes of bootstrap negates the argument that it’s too bloated, as you can simply utilise the grid and nothing else if need be.

    # September 12, 2013 at 3:03 pm

    If you are using WordPress and you are technical enough to build your own Templates, you will LOVE Bootstrap using Roots.io

    If you are technical and do not want to use the whole bloated bootstrap, use Roots.io with grunt to build your own css and .js builds which will negate the statements people are making.

    If you don’t want to use a bloated framework, grab Roots.io anyway and learn how to build your own custom css using .less that will get minified and compiled neatly.

    Specifically it is using Grunt to build your project.

    # September 13, 2013 at 11:45 am

    I’m a backer of Foundation, but its kind of unfair due to my lack of experience with Bootstrap.

    For those who cite bloat, I only partially agree. If you take a full install, and use <1/2 the features, then ok. But these frameworks allow you the ability to omit/add what you need.

    It’s knowing what you can and should omit from a project, and how the framework is leveraging the technology that is the key.

    # September 20, 2013 at 7:38 am

    While browsing the net for some advanced topics I stumble upon this thread by accident and read something that really gets me on fire… Dave’s advice and ppl like him do not get it, period! I myself just left a company that is building large complex business apps only; One of my most gifted collegues there had the same absurd ideas in his furhter more pretty clear mind. I’ll try to shed some light on the subject in the hope these kind of sounds will die here and now….

    Foundation 4 vs Bootstrap 3:

    Purist/architectural point of view:
    – Foundation 4, hands down. The why:
    – Better semantic approach, less div/section clutter.
    – Bootstrap follows its foundation, but not quite yet.
    – Haven’t gone into the framework as much as I did BS, but probably ‘lighter’ for the render engine due to support for css3 spec following browsers only.

    Commercial point of view:
    – Bootstrap 3, hands down. Forget BS 2.3+!! The why:
    – Bootstrap 3 community efforts shed a big shadow on F4. Ready made full themes, control libs, etc.etc. You’ll have difficulty to choose which. Might be said this is currently more so for V2, but since V3 is only 1 month old, the machine has to still gain its momentum.
    – Bootstrap 3 supports IE7 which should be dead, but will live on (3-10% dependent on area or niche) for yet another year.
    – Bloated??! The opposite! For real world, non bootstrappy layouts, there’s too much to do yourself as it is. It’s only bloated for those who will not get into the inner workings of the system. Once aquinted with the framework, you’ll include/exclude/override any behavior easily, plugging only what needed.
    – Homebrew??! Do not let me laugh; Yes, static ‘print-like’ sites I can see. But it’s 2013 and the web needs responsiveness, kick-ass UX and more. That my friend only the greatest of developpers will pull off by themselfs, in a raid that consumes the available time and budget by factors. Did I mention the after phase where ur customers do the field testing in the wild? OMG

    Furthermore there is a missing building block when adopting BS of F4; They rule the statics, media-dependencies, but don’t provide dynamic behavior. jQuery led the way to again appreciate the awesome javascript language; It was never broken, but was doomed to live a life in a world of too many dom engines not abiding the incomplete specs. But now jquery is simply too low an abstraction to directly use for that UX we need. If you’re up to it, there is only but one prefect solution there: angular. Should you like the lesser architecture, you could go the knockout route, fueled with backbone or homebrew to supply SPA tech.

    # September 20, 2013 at 8:00 am

    I forgot to say to really get into the framework u must do the diggin. Diggin without the right tools is a garanty for failure. I’d suggest the following:

    • Learn BS3 (or F4). From their sites, or follow one of the great courses at lynda, pluralsight or even tuts.
    • Look for sites with ‘the xxx most needed extentions for [framework]’. Not only do they provide pluggable libs, they also broaden ur minds towards more posibilities with the gun u have, but do not quite fully understand yet.
    • Learn Less (BS) or Sass(F4), both excellent css pre-processors, where I would go for Sass as an architect (or mac) and for Less from a buisiness point of view (or Google, M$ and many many more)
    • Use a pre-processor language helper like Codekit (mac) or Prepros (PC) or go into the wild with bower/grunt, nodejs etc.
    • Use the best front-end web editor there is by MILES: JetBrain’s Webstorm (7 EAP) or one of its flavored cousins PHP-Storm, RubyMine or PyCharm. Beats the sh****t out of sublimetext 3, which is the second best today.
    • Buy some books about the framework, but only the latest and throw them away after 1 month, for they will be outdated.
    • Pickup some blogs about the subject.
    # September 20, 2013 at 8:09 am

    Deeve,

    Off course I get that there is a whole lot of diversity out there. And I might even join your conclusion that BS of F4 is too big a step for the regular script kid. But in my opionion they should do what they do best: serve spaghetti at a very compatitive price.

    Learning one of these frameworks is not to be taken lightly; It fills the gap that the W3C spec couldn’t solve in over 4 decades (counting from the early rank xerox days where all the html/xhtml/xslt/xpath spec are ultemately ancestors off). These frameworks provide clean ways to solve real live problems of ANY web developper. Not going into them will show every future problem the same over and over again; A nail, for a hammer is all u have.

    Even for the lightest script kiddies amongst us I would advice: Invest in ur future and learn from the guys who did the milage. U will gain sick new insights by sudying the mixins, structures and components in the framework, enabling u too go there where no-one has gone before ;)

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 64 total)

The topic ‘[Closed] Your Thoughts! Bootstrap 3 vs Foundation 4’ is closed to new replies.

icon-anchoricon-closeicon-emailicon-linkicon-logo-staricon-menuicon-nav-guideicon-searchicon-staricon-tag