Frameworks (Bootstrap, Zurb, etc.)

[StartVM]

I am curious to see what the web designers in the community think about frameworks for web design. I have worked with Bootstrap and the functionality is great, but do you also find many sites have a similar feel when they incorporate bootstrap fully? Do you find it is actually easier to start with your own code? Cheers!

[Shepred]

I tend to use Bootstrap for it's grid system and the occasional button. If prefer doing my own code for the rest, as otherwise I feel that my websites lose the "exclusive" feel I wish to create. That is however just my opinion, I would be very interested in finding out how other people utilize the different frameworks.

[Tom]

I agree, if you just use solely Bootstrap components your site looks the same as all the rest. You need to integrate it well with your own design.

Personally wouldn't use it thought, as helpful as Bootstrap may be it's quite poorly written. Prefer others.

[freshJet]

Never used bootstrap nor do I plan on it, for the reason that everyone else uses it. Basically what Tom said about your site looking the same as the rest.

I personally find it easier to use my own code, not only that, but it's much more fulfilling as well.

[magicflyer]

I used to work with bootstrap, but I've reduced the use of it now and mostly work with the 960 grid system for the layout. Bootstrap is a bit too "constant across sites" unless you really customize it. I usually let the VA pick which framework they rather use, and most tend to to work with bootstrap due to the ease of editing should the need arise.

[StartVM]

I agree, if you just use solely Bootstrap components your site looks the same as all the rest. You need to integrate it well with your own design.

Personally wouldn't use it thought, as helpful as Bootstrap may be it's quite poorly written. Prefer others.

I am interested in what you mentioned about the poorly written code. Is this that it is difficult to customize; or that the elements are not compatible with some custom code?

[StartVM]

I used to work with bootstrap, but I've reduced the use of it now and mostly work with the 960 grid system for the layout. Bootstrap is a bit too "constant across sites" unless you really customize it. I usually let the VA pick which framework they rather use, and most tend to to work with bootstrap due to the ease of editing should the need arise.

I totally agree with you on the "constant across sites" part. What I find nice, is bootstrap is easy to customize, but it can also be very time consuming trying to figure out what Div Classes to modify and expand on.

[Tom]

I am interested in what you mentioned about the poorly written code. Is this that it is difficult to customize; or that the elements are not compatible with some custom code?

I read a good article describing the various things wrong - I can't find it now, however it's generally due to how bulky it is, that it doesn't follow best practices, lots of instances of !important (you should avoid) - 43 to be precise.

My preferred framework at the moment is pure (http://purecss.io), it's much lighter and forces you to use a lot more of your own design (a good thing). For comparison, purecss uses !important only once.

[StartVM]

I read a good article describing the various things wrong - I can't find it now, however it's generally due to how bulky it is, that it doesn't follow best practices, lots of instances of !important (you should avoid) - 43 to be precise.

My preferred framework at the moment is pure (http://purecss.io), it's much lighter and forces you to use a lot more of your own design (a good thing). For comparison, purecss uses !important only once.

Ahh. You are totally right Tom. I was coding a skin using Bootstrap and it took forever because of all the !importants so yes, I can understand now and I am very curious to try some other frameworks so I will give purecss a "code"!