Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hands on with Bootstrap 3 - A landing page

williamghelfi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 58 posts

Re: Hands on with Bootstrap 3 - A landing page

#41

Post by lucisferre »

ayi wrote: post #21
lucisferre wrote: post #13

One of my biggest complaints with Bootstrap is the grid system (classes or mixins) and the very strict hierarchy of container > row > columns. I find this pattern leads to a lot more extraneous elements than I would like. I'd compare this to [Bourbon Neat]( http://neat.bourbon.io/ ) (which I've only looked over) and [Foundation's grid]( http://foundation.zurb.com/docs/components/grid.html ) mixins which seem to be mu…

you can use semantic naming with bootstrap too. .wrapper { .make-row(); } .content-main { .make-column(8); } .content-secondary { .make-column(3); .make-column-offset(1); } ... ...

This is the exact thing I'm talking about. Try doing that without a container as a top-level container so you actually have:

Besides what, semantically speaking, is a wrapper anyways?

Re: Hands on with Bootstrap 3 - A landing page

#42

Post by lucisferre »

jlees wrote: post #23
lucisferre wrote: post #13

One of my biggest complaints with Bootstrap is the grid system (classes or mixins) and the very strict hierarchy of container > row > columns. I find this pattern leads to a lot more extraneous elements than I would like. I'd compare this to [Bourbon Neat]( http://neat.bourbon.io/ ) (which I've only looked over) and [Foundation's grid]( http://foundation.zurb.com/docs/components/grid.html ) mixins which seem to be mu…

The timing of this post is fortuitous, as I'm looking at building a landing page and had a long discussion last night with a front-end developer about using Bootstrap to do it. He's urging me to use Foundation instead. I haven't developed production level front-end code for years, and Bootstrap looks like a quick and easy way to get something up that doesn't look like arse (instead, it looks like Bootstrap). But I am…

I don't know why people say Bootstrap is "bloated" and Foundation is not. They are pretty similar, in fact the Foundation CSS has a larger footprint (86kb vs 65kb). I think people say it because Foundation feels more "raw" but this is not a selling point in my opinion. In fact I find that Foundation's biggest flaw is that it's components don't look that hot.

I will also agree Bootstrap is a quick and easy way to get something up. I would argue it is quicker and easier than Foundation, but many people with serious CSS skills don't want to work with it for some of the reasons I brought up. I think that Foundation is more flexible and extensible which is a big strength.

However, none of this is that important for a landing page, I have been able to build landing pages quite comfortably with both and don't think either has a huge advantage here. A landing page isn't a huge task either so I'd try doing a rough design on paper and building with both to see which you like best.

I will probably concede though for most "product/fit" finding experiments Bootstrap may still have the speed advantage, particularly if you are not that familiar with CSS (in fact I credit Bootstrap with teaching me a lot about CSS).

Re: Hands on with Bootstrap 3 - A landing page

#44

Post by sologoub »

sologoub wrote: post #27
trumbitta2 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks :) The problems you are reporting sound strange to me, because it works on my Android 2.3 with default browser... BTW, I didn't specifically focus on obtaining a more than "ok" version on mobile, this time ;)

I'm using Chrome on 4.3 (Galaxy Nexus) and safari on the iphone (fully updated to whatever is the latest).

On Nexus 7 (1st gen) the background is visible, but in portrait mode only covers 3/4 of the screen. In landscape looks normal.

Re: Hands on with Bootstrap 3 - A landing page

#46

Post by EugeneOZ »

zalew wrote: post #37
EugeneOZ wrote: post #34

It's annoying that EACH input field in BS3 should have class .form-control and that requirement to be inside span<row<container - very high coupled. But Foundation 4 is unacceptable ugly, despite of awesome grid...

ugly? you know you're supposed to adapt css to your design, not the other way around, right?

Yes ugly. And not, CSS framework it's not only grid, it's styles also.

Re: Hands on with Bootstrap 3 - A landing page

#47

Post by rimantas »

lucisferre wrote: post #41
ayi wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can use semantic naming with bootstrap too. .wrapper { .make-row(); } .content-main { .make-column(8); } .content-secondary { .make-column(3); .make-column-offset(1); } ... ...

This is the exact thing I'm talking about. Try doing that without a container as a top-level container so you actually have: Besides what, semantically speaking, is a wrapper anyways?

And what is a div, semantically speaking? Wrapper is the same, only with class attached for identification/styling purposes.

Re: Hands on with Bootstrap 3 - A landing page

#48

Post by tracker1 »

lucisferre wrote: post #42
jlees wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The timing of this post is fortuitous, as I'm looking at building a landing page and had a long discussion last night with a front-end developer about using Bootstrap to do it. He's urging me to use Foundation instead. I haven't developed production level front-end code for years, and Bootstrap looks like a quick and easy way to get something up that doesn't look like arse (instead, it looks like Bootstrap). But I am…

I don't know why people say Bootstrap is "bloated" and Foundation is not. They are pretty similar, in fact the Foundation CSS has a larger footprint (86kb vs 65kb). I think people say it because Foundation feels more "raw" but this is not a selling point in my opinion. In fact I find that Foundation's biggest flaw is that it's components don't look that hot. I will also agree Bootstrap is a quick and easy way to get…

What's funny is how many people use the kitchen sink (all-in) bootstrap.min.css files... I generally pull the source .less files and then copy the variables, and mixins file, and create my own bootstrap-custom.less that points to the copied files, and the rest of the original... from there, I can modify the copied bits at will, and better integrate my own extensions.

Re: Hands on with Bootstrap 3 - A landing page

#49

Post by tracker1 »

wil421 wrote: post #39

Bootstrap is great but I usually end up having to override a lot and it ends up becoming a pain sometime. Also if the responsive theme isn't set up right it can end up looking like a disaster.

It works better if you use the source .less files, and make your own modifications as needed.. I make copies of the variables and mixins, and generally only need to edit my copies, then have a custom less that loads my variables/mixins along with the other source files as-is.
Post reply on HN