5 ms·

I had been using bootstrap for a while until I found http://bulma.io http://bulma.io now I can't stand bootstrap. Still bootstrap has been amazing over the yea

I had been using bootstrap for a while until I found http://bulma.io http://bulma.io now I can't stand bootstrap. Still bootstrap has been amazing over the years.

koverda 9y ago
Why do you prefer bulma?
- petepete 9y ago
  Bulma, and others like it (Milligram is my favourite) have enough functionality to get going: responsive layout/grid, typography, form styling) but they don't have a huge, heavy set of components and requirements like Bootstrap. I think people really au fait with CSS prefer to add only what they need rather than serve Bootstrap entirely.
  - SippinLean 9y ago
    > but they don't have a huge, heavy set of components and requirements like Bootstrap That's a drawback. For BS3 or 4 I can just comment out what I don't need. If I do need many of the components and JS modules that Bootstrap provides OOTB, I have to write them myself. I'm using a CSS framework to avoid doing that.
  - allover 9y ago
    > but they don't have a huge, heavy set of components and requirements like Bootstrap. But that's all optional, Bootstrap is modular [1] [2] [3]. [1] https://getbootstrap.com/docs/3.3/customize/ https://getbootstrap.com/docs/3.3/customize/ [2] https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap-sass/blob/master/assets/stylesheets/_bootstrap.scss https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap-sass/blob/master/assets/st... [3] https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/blob/v3-dev/less/bootstrap.less https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/blob/v3-dev/less/bootstrap...
- JTenerife 9y ago
  I've just started using Bulma with Angular. I don't need or want any javascript, but a pure CSS framework, which Bulma is. Edit: And can be easily customized.
kimjongman 9y ago
Looks good. I'm going to try bulma for my next project
inertial 9y ago
I've been watching bulma and it's definitely promising. Would you care to elaborate what are the things that you "can't stand" with bootstrap ? After having used bootstrap for so long, I understand it's strengths & shortcomings quite well. I feel there's little to complain with bootstrap, and little to gain by ditching it. Would love to be proved wrong.
- rdsubhas 9y ago
  Unless you're using bootstrap components as-in-the-examples in the same context and elements, they work fine. But try using them somewhere, like an input or button in a table cell, or card in a grid, etc - and you'll spend an eternity of "unsetting". Basically bootstrap is not composeable. It provides not just a set of styles - but also a severely restricted visual design. People quickly run into elements that bootstrap was just not designed to be placed into. That's why there are so many forks/extensions of bootstrap, like bootstrap-admin and so on. So its good to start with and follow the official style guide. But doing anything more, and the restrictions immediately bubble up. And then you quickly run into an entirely different set of problems on organizing your own CSS, like using SASS, BEM, etc. Its not a question of OOCSS vs BEM, but more of how tolerant/accomodative the framework is in using it in different elements and contexts. Bootstrap's tolerance is relatively low compared to most other frameworks.
  - inertial 9y ago
    > bootstrap is not composeable Definitely share that pain. Is there a mature framework that solves it ?
  - SippinLean 9y ago
    How is Bulma different in that regard? BS4's modules and components are highly portable and work in pretty much any context. I don't see how offering a theme customization tool results in a "severely restricted visual design", it allows the freedom to make any visual design you want. BS4 is MUCH more than visuals/UI.
- philliphaydon 9y ago
subsection1h 9y ago
Bulma's hoverable dropdown menus don't seem to be accessible via keyboard navigation. One of the nice things about Bootstrap is that the developers have closed more than 15,000 issues, and in the process, have addressed many edge cases that other CSS frameworks haven't.
- timdorr 9y ago
  That's a fair point (issues closed) and is actually pointed out on their comparison to Bootstrap page: http://bulma.io/alternative-to-bootstrap/ http://bulma.io/alternative-to-bootstrap/
  - rkuykendall-com 9y ago
    They're going to have to drop all their flexbox language once Bootstrap 4 leaves beta.
SippinLean 9y ago
Bulma is severly limited compared to BS4, lacking many major components (I don't even think there are any JS components) and all the best parts are almost identical to BS, in same cases with identical naming. There is no tool to customize your theme, like BS has. I can take the BS source, comment out half of it and end up with Bulma. If I started with Bulma, I'd have to write lots of code to end up with a framework that rivals BS.
- philliphaydon 9y ago
  No Javascript is great. Bootstrap requires jquery, some making some events really hard to manage with react or angular. And react/angular bootstrap libraries are restrictive that it makes it hard to extend features of bootstrap. All these issues go away with bulma. No tool to customise theme is great. I don't want a bootstrap looking theme. It gets in the way... bootstrap is structure and styling throwing in the kitchen sink and half the house but not adding any doors or windows and you can't hide a builder to add more without it costing a kidney.
  - SippinLean 9y ago
    >No Javascript is great Then don't use the JS parts of BS? >No tool to customise theme is great. I don't want a bootstrap looking theme. These sentences are contradictory. The tool allows you to make a theme that doesn't look like everyone else's. Bulma does not have this option. You will end up with a "Bulma-looking" theme. >It gets in the way Unlike Bulma's visual styling? If you don't want a default-looking theme, wouldn't you need to customize it then? Doesn't lacking any tools to do so make this harder? I don't understand this argument.
    - philliphaydon 9y ago
      Sometimes styling bootstrap is Super frustrating. Same with foundation and semantic UI. Bulma and other small libraries are much more flexible in this regard.
  - tracker1 9y ago

I had been using bootstrap for a while until I found http://bulma.io http://bulma.io now I can't stand bootstrap. Still bootstrap has been amazing over the years.

koverda 9y ago

Why do you prefer bulma?

petepete 9y ago
Bulma, and others like it (Milligram is my favourite) have enough functionality to get going: responsive layout/grid, typography, form styling) but they don't have a huge, heavy set of components and requirements like Bootstrap. I think people really au fait with CSS prefer to add only what they need rather than serve Bootstrap entirely.
- SippinLean 9y ago
  > but they don't have a huge, heavy set of components and requirements like Bootstrap That's a drawback. For BS3 or 4 I can just comment out what I don't need. If I do need many of the components and JS modules that Bootstrap provides OOTB, I have to write them myself. I'm using a CSS framework to avoid doing that.
- allover 9y ago
  > but they don't have a huge, heavy set of components and requirements like Bootstrap. But that's all optional, Bootstrap is modular [1] [2] [3]. [1] https://getbootstrap.com/docs/3.3/customize/ https://getbootstrap.com/docs/3.3/customize/ [2] https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap-sass/blob/master/assets/stylesheets/_bootstrap.scss https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap-sass/blob/master/assets/st... [3] https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/blob/v3-dev/less/bootstrap.less https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/blob/v3-dev/less/bootstrap...
JTenerife 9y ago
I've just started using Bulma with Angular. I don't need or want any javascript, but a pure CSS framework, which Bulma is. Edit: And can be easily customized.

kimjongman 9y ago

Looks good. I'm going to try bulma for my next project

inertial 9y ago

I've been watching bulma and it's definitely promising. Would you care to elaborate what are the things that you "can't stand" with bootstrap ? After having used bootstrap for so long, I understand it's strengths & shortcomings quite well. I feel there's little to complain with bootstrap, and little to gain by ditching it. Would love to be proved wrong.

rdsubhas 9y ago
Unless you're using bootstrap components as-in-the-examples in the same context and elements, they work fine. But try using them somewhere, like an input or button in a table cell, or card in a grid, etc - and you'll spend an eternity of "unsetting". Basically bootstrap is not composeable. It provides not just a set of styles - but also a severely restricted visual design. People quickly run into elements that bootstrap was just not designed to be placed into. That's why there are so many forks/extensions of bootstrap, like bootstrap-admin and so on. So its good to start with and follow the official style guide. But doing anything more, and the restrictions immediately bubble up. And then you quickly run into an entirely different set of problems on organizing your own CSS, like using SASS, BEM, etc. Its not a question of OOCSS vs BEM, but more of how tolerant/accomodative the framework is in using it in different elements and contexts. Bootstrap's tolerance is relatively low compared to most other frameworks.
- inertial 9y ago
  > bootstrap is not composeable Definitely share that pain. Is there a mature framework that solves it ?
- SippinLean 9y ago
  How is Bulma different in that regard? BS4's modules and components are highly portable and work in pretty much any context. I don't see how offering a theme customization tool results in a "severely restricted visual design", it allows the freedom to make any visual design you want. BS4 is MUCH more than visuals/UI.
philliphaydon 9y ago

subsection1h 9y ago

Bulma's hoverable dropdown menus don't seem to be accessible via keyboard navigation. One of the nice things about Bootstrap is that the developers have closed more than 15,000 issues, and in the process, have addressed many edge cases that other CSS frameworks haven't.

timdorr 9y ago
That's a fair point (issues closed) and is actually pointed out on their comparison to Bootstrap page: http://bulma.io/alternative-to-bootstrap/ http://bulma.io/alternative-to-bootstrap/
- rkuykendall-com 9y ago
  They're going to have to drop all their flexbox language once Bootstrap 4 leaves beta.

SippinLean 9y ago

Bulma is severly limited compared to BS4, lacking many major components (I don't even think there are any JS components) and all the best parts are almost identical to BS, in same cases with identical naming. There is no tool to customize your theme, like BS has. I can take the BS source, comment out half of it and end up with Bulma. If I started with Bulma, I'd have to write lots of code to end up with a framework that rivals BS.

philliphaydon 9y ago
No Javascript is great. Bootstrap requires jquery, some making some events really hard to manage with react or angular. And react/angular bootstrap libraries are restrictive that it makes it hard to extend features of bootstrap. All these issues go away with bulma. No tool to customise theme is great. I don't want a bootstrap looking theme. It gets in the way... bootstrap is structure and styling throwing in the kitchen sink and half the house but not adding any doors or windows and you can't hide a builder to add more without it costing a kidney.
- SippinLean 9y ago
  >No Javascript is great Then don't use the JS parts of BS? >No tool to customise theme is great. I don't want a bootstrap looking theme. These sentences are contradictory. The tool allows you to make a theme that doesn't look like everyone else's. Bulma does not have this option. You will end up with a "Bulma-looking" theme. >It gets in the way Unlike Bulma's visual styling? If you don't want a default-looking theme, wouldn't you need to customize it then? Doesn't lacking any tools to do so make this harder? I don't understand this argument.
  - philliphaydon 9y ago
    Sometimes styling bootstrap is Super frustrating. Same with foundation and semantic UI. Bulma and other small libraries are much more flexible in this regard.
- tracker1 9y ago