If anyone is looking for a basic summary of "What's new", the best I found was their blog post about plans for v3: http://blog.getbootstrap.com/2012/12/10/bootstrap-3-plans/
Thanks man. Great straightforward list.
Bootstrap 3 preview
131–140 of 166 posts
Re: Bootstrap 3 preview
#132Re: Bootstrap 3 preview
#133The issue Bootstrap still has is that the parts that make use of JavaScript completely rely on JavaScript. If you're on a flakey data connection, for example, and JavaScript doesn't load parts of the page simply break. The tab component is a good example of this - turn off JavaScript in your browser and you'll see that it still looks like tabs (thanks to CSS) but you just can't access anything part from the first tab…
I disagree. As a web designer/developer your job is to make sure your site looks proper. If someone chooses to disable javascript, they know that they are missing out. It's their personal choice to embrace an inferior web experience, and I don't think it's fair to have to compensate for them as well.
It is totally fair unless you're creating a web application but my idea is that the first priority of a content-heavy web site should be to make its content as accessible as possible. Also, inferior experience should not mean they miss more than half the content.
Re: Bootstrap 3 preview
#134I don't get this flat look, it reminds me of Windows 8. Is it a new trand in web design?
Re: Bootstrap 3 preview
#135Not sure if I like this at all. I think they need to call it Bootstrap 3: flat and fat! It just seems like a huge step back to me. It's not even an elegant "flat" design; it's like they scrapped everything and decided to make all classes (even buttons for God's sake) DIVs of different colors. The new navbar, for example, is literally a gray DIV with rounded edges. I use Bootstrap on my web app because I care about de…
The more people stop using Bootstrap as a complete design the happier I will be.
There is something I keep pointing out when inevitably the conversation turns this way: Bootstrap (and Foundation) are UI widget libraries, not just prototyping helpers. They are the missing rich widget set that browsers should provide by default if they were proper application runtimes and not the patched together mess they have grown into. A good comparison would be Sencha ExtJS, but for markup instead of full JavaScript: you have layout elements (the grid), a set of reusable controls, and some helpers (typography, etc).
A lot of web applications -- line-of-business but also consumer-oriented -- should NOT be visibly unique, and styling your own buttons not only is a big waste of time, but also reduces usability. Look at the WinForms/Cocoa/GTK environments to see the value of a single visual language in action (including their respective UI guides that help with a consistent experience). The popularity of Bootstrap tells you the need is still there -- for both the millions of developers who need to get the job done without reinventing too many wheels on top of broken hypertext, and for the users who appreciate not having to figure out a UI for the millionth time (just ask your boss/customer what they think of your boring Bootstrap app, they probably love it).
Re: Bootstrap 3 preview
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why it is in preview and not released?
I'm previewing my new flying car. It doesn't fly yet but it drives great on the road.
Except instead of making a "flying first" car from scratch you start with your existing car as a prototype to build your first "flying first" car that you plan to give away for free and open source it.
Then all the of flying community come out of the woodwork to cry bloody murder it isn't flying yet when you just strapped on some wings and aren't finished. Then you start to wonder if it's worth sharing both the process and the product in the first place when you have to deal with all the kids out there who cry as if their lollipop was stolen.
Re: Bootstrap 3 preview
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not everyone is a HTML/CSS hacker. It's a really valuable front-end framework. My app wouldn't look nearly as professional without it.
It's OK for the first iterations, but if you really care about your product, you should hire a HTML/CSS hacker.
If you really care about your customers instead of your product, and they are more than happy with the "professional" Bootstrap UI, you have no reason to mess with it.
What is always good to have is a designer or at least a developer with an eye for aesthetics, to use the Bootstrap elements in an elegant way. Otherwise, what would you "hack" about HTML/CSS? Either reimplementing Bootstrap, or playing with the latest and greatest that won't work in anything else but the latest Chrome (see the IE6/7 discussion).
Re: Bootstrap 3 preview
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
IE7 doesn't cause nearly the same scale of problems that IE6 did; I don't think 1% is small enough to justify ignoring it entirely. (I suppose it depends on whether it degrades gracefully or becomes unusable.)
Indeed, I'm starting a responsive site design project that will have a large target audience in China... where some 20% of users are still on IE6. Looks like I'll be testing both Bootstrap and Foundation.
Heh, good luck doing responsive on IE6 without going crazy!
Re: Bootstrap 3 preview
#139Meh. too flat
I hear you can style the buttons yourself using css!
Re: Bootstrap 3 preview
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. As a web designer/developer your job is to make sure your site looks proper. If someone chooses to disable javascript, they know that they are missing out. It's their personal choice to embrace an inferior web experience, and I don't think it's fair to have to compensate for them as well.
...except that JS can also fail due to network lag or simple programming errors (like a trailing JSON comma in IE). Ideally, sites should remain as functional as possible if JS or CSS fail to load. (Admittedly, a great many large websites fail this test.)
Requiring a refresh is not outlandish. If they failed to load the content due to network error, they will already be used to that kind of flaky connection and the refreshes it requires.
Specifically building your app to attempt to handle the "bad data connection" use case that users already are familiar with in the context of the internet seems like bad programming.
Why provide a usable but substandard experience when those users would get a superior experience after a simple refresh?
As for the "turned it off crowd": in terms of web apps, who cares? If you've disabled Javascript, you're not looking to use web apps -- period. Javascript is required to use web apps for anything other than fancy form posting...
Of course, every site's audience is different, and you should prioritize your development for your audience.