Built With Bootstrap
builtwithbootstrap.com
builtwithbootstrap.com
I'm still not sure if I would use it in a 'production' application though (perhaps with a lot of fiddling to the default styles).
As a side note has anyone else found it funny that a few months ago anyone submitting a project to HN that used bootstrap would get comments like "awesome using bootstrap", "bootstrap is the new standard for the web", etc. And quickly the sentiment is turning to "yuck another bootstrap site" and "learn some css you fools".
http://blog.jenius.me/post/18909693841/to-bootstrap-or-not-t...
http://blog.jenius.me/post/17162410587/stop-using-bootstrap-...
They linked this: http://lesswrong.com/lw/2pv/intellectual_hipsters_and_metaco...
Once I got past the vague offense at thinking of someone calling me an intellectual hipster, the point sunk in and I tried to move on.
In fact, just yesterday I wrote a blog post about my thoughts on using Bootstrap in "production": http://www.projectorpm.com/blog/2012/03/10/dont-hate-twitter... (FYI, the blog and the product are both built using Bootstrap)
Bootstrap's strength is that you can use to to quickly build a uniform, fully functional, cohesive and clean UI.
Just because you can, it doesn't mean you have to.... and just because you don't have to, doesn't mean you shouldn't. It needs to be evaluated on a per-project basis, like anything else we do. Some tools and services really call for a custom look. Some, let's be honest, just don't.
I see things like internal tools being a great example of when to use Boostrap's defaults--that web app to visualize analytics on your data, your ticketing system, that private web interface you built for your Git repositories, the documentation manager, etc. Use Bootstrap, be cool with it, free up your designers and creative energy to roll out custom layouts on your client-facing pages.
At the end of the day, use what's right for the job and if you want to let the world know about it, give us a submission and we'll get you on there for free.
The one I have in mind is a tech demo of a Bootstrap module for a web framework. It looks good and is clearly Bootstrap, but very far from the default Bootstrap theme, and really shows off how customizable Bootstrap is. It also uses the Zurb Foundation mobile layout instead of Bootstrap's.
Would that count?
If anyone is interested in helping out or testing, look me up (my name is jeff escalante) and send me an email.
However, it's been my experience that the design of most midsize and larger projects is greatly influenced by a designer. And unless they design with bootstrap or any other CSS framework in mind, you easily wind up in a square-peg-round-hole situation.
Honestly, I don't get what all the fuss is about. Bootstrap is just another web theme. Sure it looks nice, and is pretty flexible. But it's still just a theme.
I make websites because I want to share information and programs I have written with people. I want to do that as efficiently as possible, so I can get back to making more interesting things.
When it comes down to spending 10 hours on a fancy button that works in all browsers vs spending that time adding features I welcome tools such as bootstrap and jquery.
Until then, until you've wrestled with 19 variations of CSS hacks on IE5-10, multiple Safari versions, mobile devices and everything else and get it pixel perfect and can do it in your sleep, you're not a real developer. Doesn't matter if that time would be better spent promoting, selling, securing against sql injection/csrf/etc, optimization, or just... having a life - unless you know all versions of CSS across all platforms by heart, you're "uninterested in the craft".
The philosophy of a real developer is that if you ever use someone else's code, you have avoided pain, and thus enlightenment. Enlightenment brings perfect code. The realest of the real roll their own operating systems, complete with custom assembler instructions, and they would never stoop to following a tutorial. Tutorials are the wussies' playthings. To achieve enlightenment, you must achieve the three essential qualities: confusion, anger, and despair. Wussy programmers avoid these things.
Pain-oriented programming may be organized according to units of frustration. Our taxonomy of frustrations includes three types: code frustration, developer frustration, and meta-frustration, the last of which deals with the anguish of being frustrated at being frustrated so much. Pain-oriented programming aims to maximize all of these frustrations.
Wussy programmers, on the other hand, love frameworks, code reuse, and Maven repositories. Wussy programmers are content to avoid reinventing the wheel (a necessary first step for all real programmers), because they have concerns for such silly frivolities as deadlines, maintainability, and standards. The minute you begin to care about anything other than perfect code, you stray from pain, and you might as well stick to writing in cute kiddie languages like Alice.
The assembler folks once sneered at those using higher-level languages.
The higher-level language folks sneered at the 3GLs and the interpreted language folks.
The HTML folks sneered at the folks using Dreamweaver.
The folks using editors sneered at the folks using IDEs.
Understanding the stack is good.
But assuming folks should re-live the foibles of the whole stack, and particularly the painful parts of the stack? Not so much.
People use these things to get shit done. I use them to get shit done and I've been doing this for 15+ years now.
"Craft wanking" might soothe your arrogance, but it won't help you ship anything.
That is all
Bootstrap is a great tool, and I've used it in my projects before. It's amazing how fast you can get something up and running. But in the hands of the lazy, it's a curse.
After all, could you not consider a web browser a tool for the lazy web developer who doesn't want to learn how to make slick cross platform native applications?
In desktop environments for the most part windows apps look like windows apps and osx apps look like osx apps. A consistant look and feel across applications on a platform gives users a familiar and comfortable experience. This has been a detriment of java desktop apps for years as they appear 'foreign' to the end user.
Is there perhaps an argument that the web as a platform is missing out on this benefit of consistency?
BUT, I'd say that people seems to only use the SAME bootstrap page; I.e. it's a big framework with lots of useful snippets.. it's sad that we only see the black top bar thingy everywhere.