4 ms·

Bootstrap is a, well, bootstrap. You're supposed to build upon it, so having a "flat" base makes sense since it's less hassle to add CSS properties (and give yo

Bootstrap is a, well, bootstrap. You're supposed to build upon it, so having a "flat" base makes sense since it's less hassle to add CSS properties (and give your buttons some bevels) than override existing ones.

davidw 13y ago
While it might not be much "hassle" in terms of adding some code, the part I appreciate most about bootstrap is that it's put together by competent designers and looks good as a whole. Once I start f'ing around with individual bits and pieces, my guess is that things are going to go to hell in a handbasket in short order, which sort of defeats the purpose of the whole thing in the first place. Also, my guess is that the flat base is there because that's what's cool these days. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing: for a lot of people, having something that looks modern and recent is pretty important too. Just that I'm worried about it, a little bit.
- ryanSrich 13y ago
  You should never rely on the styling for a public facing website. Sure, if you're building a side projects or perhaps even an MVP, go for it. However, if you're building a site to service a market, whether it be selling something, publishing something, etc. you should always go with a unique design. Bootstrap is great for having some underlying architecture but the visual styles should rarely be used. Keeping the original bootstrap style says a few things about you and your product: You're either lazy, poor at design, or don't care enough to hire a competent designer.
  - scotth 13y ago
    Entirely unconvincing argument. Uniqueness of design isn't necessarily as important as you make it out to be. Most customers would not even notice.
    - djrobstep 13y ago
      Indeed. In fact, being directly instructed by the client to copy their competitor's website happens more than some people might think.
  - latchkey 13y ago
    I stopped at 'you should never'
  - hackula1 13y ago
    Option 4: Your design skills are too good-- way ahead of their time-- and will not be understood until years after your death.

davidw 13y ago

While it might not be much "hassle" in terms of adding some code, the part I appreciate most about bootstrap is that it's put together by competent designers and looks good as a whole. Once I start f'ing around with individual bits and pieces, my guess is that things are going to go to hell in a handbasket in short order, which sort of defeats the purpose of the whole thing in the first place. Also, my guess is that the flat base is there because that's what's cool these days. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing: for a lot of people, having something that looks modern and recent is pretty important too. Just that I'm worried about it, a little bit.

ryanSrich 13y ago
You should never rely on the styling for a public facing website. Sure, if you're building a side projects or perhaps even an MVP, go for it. However, if you're building a site to service a market, whether it be selling something, publishing something, etc. you should always go with a unique design. Bootstrap is great for having some underlying architecture but the visual styles should rarely be used. Keeping the original bootstrap style says a few things about you and your product: You're either lazy, poor at design, or don't care enough to hire a competent designer.
- scotth 13y ago
  Entirely unconvincing argument. Uniqueness of design isn't necessarily as important as you make it out to be. Most customers would not even notice.
  - djrobstep 13y ago
    Indeed. In fact, being directly instructed by the client to copy their competitor's website happens more than some people might think.
- latchkey 13y ago
  I stopped at 'you should never'
- hackula1 13y ago
  Option 4: Your design skills are too good-- way ahead of their time-- and will not be understood until years after your death.