51–60 of 73 posts
It feels to close to Bootstrap without bringing enough new stuff to the table to be worth it. It's nice to see people making alternatives, but it needs to be a lot more developed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Forms is a nice addition over Bootstrap for me.
Bootstrap has always had forms.
Seriously now, yes, Bootstrap has always had forms. But as a developer who merely dabbles in design, I personally prefer Ink's markup because it's responsive off the bat (at least compared to BS 2.0, haven't tried 3.0).
Can we please come up with a better markup for form element grouping than "div.control-group"? Specifically, HTML has always allowed nesting an inside - and that's more than enough to create either a horizontal or stacked layout. No s needed. And no "for" attribute needed with an unnecessary input ID.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They support IE7, which I believe Bootstrap 3 has dropped. If you don't do the comparison yourself, you're at risk of losing out.
I'm at risk of losing out if I have to go through 20 pages of documentation and compare line-for-line against Bootstrap rather than the creator going "we decided not to just re-skin Bootstrap primarily for reasons A, B, and C".
Their primary job is not marketing. Their primary job is to build the framework.
Why do you think things like Y Combinator exists? They do some work others aren't willing to and others lose out because of it.
It's to the developer's benefit to tell you why his product is good, but it's not their duty. These guys worked on and released a free product for you. You can choose to use it if you want but they don't owe you anything or an explanation of why it's better than Bootstrap.
I think this is cool, so I say good job on that front. But I kind of feel like you're trying to introduce yet another low end sedan. There's already hundreds, and I've already purchased one. It's gonna take at least a few more years for me to be ready to shop for a new one.
Well, we're not actually selling, but rather giving it away :) Seriously now, it's been in internal use for a good while because it solved problems that Bootstrap didn't address (like the particular grid flavour and some corner cases in responsive layouts), and the best way gather feedback and improve it is, of course, making it public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm at risk of losing out if I have to go through 20 pages of documentation and compare line-for-line against Bootstrap rather than the creator going "we decided not to just re-skin Bootstrap primarily for reasons A, B, and C".
I'm going to reveal a big secret. I actually managed to find out the tidbit about IE 7 without reading it line by line. Their primary job is not marketing. Their primary job is to build the framework. Why do you think things like Y Combinator exists? They do some work others aren't willing to and others lose out because of it. It's to the developer's benefit to tell you why his product is good, but it's not their dut…
Of course they don't own those 3 letters which have a wide array of meaning, similar to words like "bootstrap", "ember", "buffer", or "backbone". I'd be hesitant to use those words in a product, open source or otherwise, however.
For instance, if I want a two column layout, I put two divs inside the '.column-group' container. Now (theoretically) if I were to dynamically add a third column, it seems that Ink would automatically adjust the other two columns to fit.
With bootstrap, I would need to change the '.spanx' of each div within the '.row'