- This topic is empty.
September 20, 2013 at 8:15 am #150732Paulie_DMember
And “script kiddies” must write in text-speak too…not real English like grown-ups.
Not that I know WTF a “script kiddy” is.
:)September 20, 2013 at 8:17 am #150734
Btw, I’m sorry if I used words that offend u. It is not my goal, I like to have a real discussion about the subject and u receive some of my build up anger other very very gifted developers made me have; Not seeing beyond their own limitations.
I’m an architect, currently building the perfect stack by using everything awesome out there, pumped up and pushed even further by my own magic. Yes, that’s maybe a different angle than yours, but from here I can also see the fields that are in front of u maybe better than urself.
Nonetheless, everybody is entitled to his/her own opionion off course! (Sorry for the spelling here and there, but I’m not a native en speaker).September 20, 2013 at 8:20 am #150735
And yes, People are all equal into the eyes of God, but we all have our own paths to follow and therefore makes us by definition unequal into the earthly things.
DO NOT GO THERE, I can use my time better than that and are too much an out of the box person to beat at that gameSeptember 20, 2013 at 8:21 am #150738
Q.E.D. (latin that is)September 20, 2013 at 8:23 am #150742
U do, as do ISeptember 20, 2013 at 8:33 am #150746
Okay, I think I must make an appologise here; It is not my intention to offend people. I even learned that once offended, there is no room for anything you’ve said; Not the ugly, not the bad, not the good.
So here it is: I’m sorry for the harsh words; They were used in a conversation of blacks and whites, to clearify thruths that IRL are everything but. The stereotypes do not apply to you, nor to anyone here. I’ve seen so called script-kiddies do things I’ve not seen done by seasoned architects and vice versa. But we are living in a rapid changing world and these frameworks are an important building block. Not only web-dev, but very soon mobile dev will drop all its native bs for html5+ tech, as will desktop / cloud dev.
Anyways, dear deeve, I wish u a good day and I’m sure you’re a great guy IRL, as am I, according to my friends that really know me hahaSeptember 20, 2013 at 8:39 am #150749Paulie_DMember
OK…we’re entirely off track…and have been for a while.
The original question asked for comparisons of the frameworks, not whether they are a good thing or not…and we went from there.
Let’s just drop it….or I’ll close it downSeptember 20, 2013 at 8:51 am #150752
I agree and am sorry for my part in this; I hope I gave some good info on the topic at least;
From a commercial / UX standpoint there is another thing to consider:
Bootstrappy (F4 has less penetration and thus less afflicted) looking sites may look cheap, thirtheen in a dozen. This is a good thing for the low-end of the market, but not so much for the upper half of the median of the market; When using these frameworks in commercially viable situations you have to really get into the inner workings to bend it’s face towards anything the designer feeds u. This is very doable for designs that match the current mobile styles and or metro style sites. This may become a problem for really artistic websites that have no clear site separations into (blok) divisions.September 23, 2013 at 9:47 am #150996
Hi friends :) from the layout framework front!
I stumbled upon a problem using bootstrap with not boostrappy-looking design I like to share. Maybe some of you guys have run into this problem or will some day.
Both foundation and BS provide a single (responsive) grid. I probably do not need tell u the value of having it, when designing responsive and adaptive layouts. My current project has a great designer attached, who comes up with visually good looking designs in which he doesn’t let himself be bothered by technical possibilities. I would not have it any other way, but the end result is a design that has divisions in it that need grids of 8, 9, 10 and 12 ‘columns’, with or without gutters. These grids sometimes are nested, sometimes sibling beneath each other.
Problem: to be true to the design having only one grid, I would make a grid of the least common multiple. In my case that would mean a staggering 180 cols! I do not have to tell u that would be a serious drain on the css involved (payload), the render engine that would really be affected and the overhead in taking n-th part of 180 for every column in the design. Route no-go off course.
We could pick offcourse a close smaller ‘common multiple’ that affects layout a bit, but keeps the total columns ‘controllable’. I would off course have to do the column caculations in the code, which is all very cumbersome.
In the light of the subject (BS vs F4) it’s no real dealbreaker, both systems only provide a single grid, with the possibility of setting only 1 gutter size. (F4 not sure here).
I solved the problem the other way around; Extended the BS framework with a multiple grid-system, supporting arbitrary sets of grid-col counts at the price of somewhat more css code. (approx 16% per extra grid to the grid-only base of 15k not-gzipped).
The point why I make it here is twofold; Firstly, I must agree with Dave some more that the system has it’s drawbacks on some layouts. Creating the multiple grid system is not something anyone just can do and there-in lies another thruth, in between Dave’s and mine; I was able to do this only by studying the spledid original work of the twitter BS team. My agumentation was a ‘natural one’, and didn’t take me that much time to create if it wasn’t for the crappy implementation of less 1.4 when it comes to generating code and reuse/extend upon generated classes. I ended up in writing a non-less-based less generator in server side code.
Should anybody be interested in the end result, I’m happy to share with u guys off course.September 23, 2013 at 10:52 am #151014feinburgrlParticipant
I don’t like either, Bootstrap 3 vs Foundation 4. The final coding is so bad and confusing to read. If its not clean then why use it. Also hate seeing 20 different js files in a html page and most of it can be done is CSS3.September 23, 2013 at 11:31 am #151022
I agree on the at ‘confusing to read’ part, if you’re no regular user. I have rewritten my fully semantic clean front-end pages to div/section (interchangable) clutter only to get the responsive/adaptive features; And now i’ve done that I couldn’t come up with a cleaner setup. Responsiveness/adaptive setups are all about redundancy, either in complete sepearate sites or something that reorganises the visible parts of a page.
BS is faithfull to IE8, which should be dead by now, but still has 2-8% penetration. Once dead, BS like F4 will allow more semantic usage of the html5 spec, solving your problem partly;
The x-js files is your problem. I code my site as separate as I can. That results in hundreds of js files alone (SPA site with angular controllers, services, directives etc. etc.), loads of control packs (BS, mobiscroll, ui-bootstrap, custom themes etc etc), and per page less implentations to keep things as DRY and SOLID as can be. From a whats get served point of view I want the best pref / smallest payload possible; For that you must use some build-system or preprocessor helper. I use my own build-system that can bundle anything and can deploy bundle of bundles in any mode (dev, production, intermediate) or sometimes use prepros (win) for ease of usage / direct update.
What I end up with is that all these files get deployed into exactly 3 files for a full single page app (pretty complex stuff): 1 html file, 1 css, 1 js. I also load 2 google fonts separately, which I could include and use a web-api and mapbox. My Y-Slow v2 score is a 100 out of 100, google speed index 85, because I haven’t tweaked that part yet. Still in deep dev phase, will do later.September 25, 2013 at 8:07 am #151191sam parmenterParticipant
Could you name a few of the other frameworks that you use for smaller projects as I am finding that for most sites I am building there is simply no need for foundation and the features it gives me. I know I can pare it down but its built in a way to allow complete integration with all the other features / plugins which tends to add bloat regardless of the few features you use.
I would like to have your views on a few alternatives that I might use as currently for smaller projects I am simply using normalize and the html5 boilerplate to start with which has been modified to use SASS and Compass for some variables and mixins.
Its hard to decide how good a framework will be without testing it a bit first and I simply don’t have the time to give each framework the required time. They also all have a tendency to claim that they are the best thing since sliced bread regardless of quality.
Any thoughts and recommendations would be appreciated.September 25, 2013 at 2:42 pm #151227MSParticipantSeptember 25, 2013 at 3:14 pm #151234DustinParticipant
There’s nothing wrong with frameworks and bloat shouldn’t be a problem with today’s speeds. One of my favorites right now is Gumby 2.5 (not lightweight).
Pure, Kube, Neat by Bourbon, Semantic Grid and intuit.css all have a small footprint. The best way to find out is to start using one on your own, or create one for yourself.September 25, 2013 at 3:27 pm #151239DustinParticipant
One of the biggest fallacies that exists. More and more people are accessing the internet via mobile devices, and more and more via non-wifi means. And while mobile networks speeds are getting faster, they are not as fast as broadband networks in most places in the world, and load time/delays are noticeable. Size & page load should still be a consideration.
I would agree with that, for sure. So for the time being it’s something to take into consideration. But as you said this is even fading away for mobile…
- The topic ‘[Closed] Your Thoughts! Bootstrap 3 vs Foundation 4’ is closed to new replies.