3 ms·

I see a few comments bringing up mobile. There's already many mobile-friendly UI frameworks; not everything has to be mobile-first. Yes, in many cases it makes

I see a few comments bringing up mobile. There's already many mobile-friendly UI frameworks; not everything has to be mobile-first. Yes, in many cases it makes sense to go for a mobile-first approach, especially with consumer-facing applications. Mobile is huge and apparently it's still continuing to grow. At the same time, there's many legitimate cases in which you want to optimize for desktop. For example: consider an IDE, where you have lots of panels and toolbars. In some cases it's unclear how you'd be able to support both desktop and mobile without significantly degrading the experience. Even Google struggles with this. How usable is Data Studio [0] on mobile? It's pretty terrible and unusable. But that's perfectly fine, because the desktop experience is great! I can't speak for others, but I can't imagine myself wanting to use a mobile device to get any work done. Kudos to Palantir for open sourcing their UI toolkit. [0] https://datastudio.google.com https://datastudio.google.com

minimaxir 10y ago
For internal projects/webpages (similar to Google Data Studio as mentioned), where you would expect the user to only be using it on a desktop, having no mobile support is fine. But for external projects/webpages in 2016, where atleast 1/3 of usage can come from mobile devices, having a lack of mobile support is a complete, 100% nonstarter. And there are plenty of competing React UI frameworks with mobile support already.
- serb348 10y ago
  Such As?
- ethanbond 10y ago
  I'm not sure how you come to this distinction between internal/external. The delineation is much simpler and more obvious. Is Blueprint made for mobile use cases? No. Therefore it's highly optimized for non-mobile use cases. Despite the buzzword focus on mobile applications, there's still plenty of work being done (and left to do!) outside of that. For those uses, Blueprint is great! This is especially valuable for teams that don't have the design talent necessary to generate something as visually rich and feature complete as Blueprint. But you're right, a mobile framework it is not.
- eyko 10y ago
  > And there are plenty of competing React UI frameworks with mobile support already. Citation needed. In all honesty though, good quality UI frameworks with good mobile support are on the top of my "#want" list.
  - woah 10y ago
    There are a bunch of bootstrap components ported to React in the Reactstrap project.

minimaxir 10y ago

For internal projects/webpages (similar to Google Data Studio as mentioned), where you would expect the user to only be using it on a desktop, having no mobile support is fine. But for external projects/webpages in 2016, where atleast 1/3 of usage can come from mobile devices, having a lack of mobile support is a complete, 100% nonstarter. And there are plenty of competing React UI frameworks with mobile support already.

serb348 10y ago
Such As?
ethanbond 10y ago
I'm not sure how you come to this distinction between internal/external. The delineation is much simpler and more obvious. Is Blueprint made for mobile use cases? No. Therefore it's highly optimized for non-mobile use cases. Despite the buzzword focus on mobile applications, there's still plenty of work being done (and left to do!) outside of that. For those uses, Blueprint is great! This is especially valuable for teams that don't have the design talent necessary to generate something as visually rich and feature complete as Blueprint. But you're right, a mobile framework it is not.
eyko 10y ago
> And there are plenty of competing React UI frameworks with mobile support already. Citation needed. In all honesty though, good quality UI frameworks with good mobile support are on the top of my "#want" list.
- woah 10y ago
  There are a bunch of bootstrap components ported to React in the Reactstrap project.