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

Bootstrap 3.2.0 released

blog.getbootstrap.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 45 posts

Re: Bootstrap 3.2.0 released

#21

Post by alexgaribay »

andybak wrote: post #14
deedubaya wrote: post #6

Bootstrap, like jQuery, was a great thing at one time. It still is a great thing to some people. Whenever I see default Bootstrap styles out in the wild though, I get pretty disgusted. Never trust a company that uses default Bootstrap styles in their production apps. It just shouts "I don't care" or "I don't know any better."

So how about all those Bootstrap sites that aren't immediately recognisable? Is it Bootstrap per se that causes your bile to rise or merely insufficiently customized Bootstrap? For example - I think many of the templates here: https://wrapbootstrap.com/ are rather lovely. Do they elicit your disgust?

Thanks for that link. I use bootstrap in all my projects. One of the templates on the landing page had exactly what I was looking to do in an upcoming design. I may just buy it and save my self from some of the time I would need to spend on custom design.

Re: Bootstrap 3.2.0 released

#22

Post by richbradshaw »

lcnmrn wrote: post #2

Why do you need Bootstrap? You can write a grid system in less than 10 lines of code with Sass. You can also do a typographic mixin in 5 lines of code then customise it as you need. You can also have a icon web font set only for tag in 5 lines of code. What else is there? Forms. You can reset the forms in another 5 lines of code then add stuff for [type=submit] and so on. Why do you need thousands of lines of code wh…

In case anyone wonders about this, https://gist.github.com/richbradshaw/8949c61fb4ba7b7ed3ba is the basic grid back from Bootstrap 2 (the .container, .row, .spanN one).

Re: Bootstrap 3.2.0 released

#23

Post by autokad »

lcnmrn wrote: post #2

Why do you need Bootstrap? You can write a grid system in less than 10 lines of code with Sass. You can also do a typographic mixin in 5 lines of code then customise it as you need. You can also have a icon web font set only for tag in 5 lines of code. What else is there? Forms. You can reset the forms in another 5 lines of code then add stuff for [type=submit] and so on. Why do you need thousands of lines of code wh…

I agree with the people who disagreed with you below, so I'll try not to reiterate the points they mentioned. For example, the most important feature (to me) of bootstrap is its wide usage/testing/community across many devices. but another salient issue is that I have other things to worry about such as content. I dont want to be fussing around with these 50 lines of code (they are very important but not the bigger picture) when there there is a tried and true framework already available.

Re: Bootstrap 3.2.0 released

#25

Post by chdir »

deedubaya wrote: post #6

Bootstrap, like jQuery, was a great thing at one time. It still is a great thing to some people. Whenever I see default Bootstrap styles out in the wild though, I get pretty disgusted. Never trust a company that uses default Bootstrap styles in their production apps. It just shouts "I don't care" or "I don't know any better."

Re-inventing the wheel is your thing then so be it. Why stop at bootstrap, stop trusting all those using jQuery too.

Re: Bootstrap 3.2.0 released

#27

Post by lcnmrn »

maaaats wrote: post #12
lcnmrn wrote: post #2

Why do you need Bootstrap? You can write a grid system in less than 10 lines of code with Sass. You can also do a typographic mixin in 5 lines of code then customise it as you need. You can also have a icon web font set only for tag in 5 lines of code. What else is there? Forms. You can reset the forms in another 5 lines of code then add stuff for [type=submit] and so on. Why do you need thousands of lines of code wh…

Would you bother showing those <50 lines of code?

Pay me 50$.

Re: Bootstrap 3.2.0 released

#28

Post by vezzy-fnord »

andybak wrote: post #10
opendais wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, to me it screams MVP by a backend focused developer. It signals the exact opposite to me as long as it is a company of only 1-2 people. They know what they are doing but have no design chops...which is much better than the reverse.

Or "they invested time in their product rather choosing to reinvent the wheel on their marketing website". Sounds like a pretty positive indicator to me.

I don't like it when people invoke "don't reinvent the wheel". Yes, if you're reimplementing standard library functionality, then you could talk about reinventing the wheel.

But a lot of the time it really means "Let frameworks do everything for you." Don't reinvent the wheel, but feel free to reimplement subsets of the wheel that aren't all too tailored to your purpose. In fact, if you're a programmer, you probably do that all the time.

Particularly when it comes to web design, there is no specific "wheel" to speak of. I'm all for using Bootstrap... as a framework, not as a template you copy and paste.

I can make exceptions for local web applications (like router interface panels) and small, one-trick apps, though.

Re: Bootstrap 3.2.0 released

#30

Post by angrymouse »

deedubaya wrote: post #6

Bootstrap, like jQuery, was a great thing at one time. It still is a great thing to some people. Whenever I see default Bootstrap styles out in the wild though, I get pretty disgusted. Never trust a company that uses default Bootstrap styles in their production apps. It just shouts "I don't care" or "I don't know any better."

Have a look at the Angular website. It is hardly anything beyond the Bootstrap style. I understand what you're saying. A lack of concern about external presentation can be a warning sign but it's not exclusive nor a reliable indicator as other commentator's have mentioned
Post reply on HN