I use bootstrap. I'm disappointed with 2; although perhaps 3 is better. I guess if you don't know css I can imagine it's a godsend: bunt frankly, basic css isn

I use bootstrap. I'm disappointed with 2; although perhaps 3 is better. I guess if you don't know css I can imagine it's a godsend: bunt frankly, basic css isn't that hard, and most of boostrap is easy to duplicate with basic css (except perhaps the media queries). Anyhow, I don't think bootstrap doesn't have good stuff; I think the way it's presented as some kind of "system" is a bad idea. It's doesn't work well as a system. It works well as a basis when someone takes the time to pick and choose what they need. You can't just take bootstrap AND some other css, use them both together, and expect both to work orthogonally without a lot of care. They will stomp on each others selectors and you'll have a specificity war on your hands. How can you make this work? By actually picking, the bits you need, and doing more than a modular concatenation with whatever other css you need. Basically: it's a great css example, not an encapsulated, finished module. When you say: "No one knows that site is bootstrap until I tell them we used it" that tells me you customized it, and that's exactly how it should be. It's not a reusable component, it's a customizable template.