For me I've found bootstrap is a perfect tool for use in tech demos, experiments, really any small project I'm using to learn some new piece of technology. Bootstrap makes it effortless to have the presentation in such demo look halfway decent.

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".

I think basic Bootstrap is great for small projects, experiments, open source projects that don't have a designer on bard, etc. and for bigger things, it's a great base to build from.

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.

I think you hit the nail on the head!

Remember: Twitter Bootstrap's UI is just some default styles. I think Bootstrap is a great foundation, just like 960gs and Blueprint. But it's just that: a foundation. Overload or add your own custom styles, and you can easily break away from the default look and feel.

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)

From your product screenshot it looks like you did a great job building on top of the default styles. I like your use of the bootstrap top nav in the sidebar.

I agree with you. It reminds me of a response someone made to me when I professed that I had a kneejerk negative reaction to something (which I admittedly still have a kneejerk negative reaction to... Oh well).

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.

Agree completely. I've made a few posts saying exactly this, but they haven't picked up enough upvotes to hit the front page : (

http://blog.jenius.me/post/18909693841/to-bootstrap-or-not-t...

http://blog.jenius.me/post/17162410587/stop-using-bootstrap-...

Bootstrap? That band sold out. They're so mainstream now.

Can I just say (as the curator of Built With Bootstrap) that we're very much looking for sites with great flair and creativity. At the same time we believe everyone deserves a fair and equal chance at some free promotion (http://builtwithbootstrap.com/post/19008579170/love-it-or-ha...).

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.

What if it's not an actual app/site, but a tech demo using Bootstrap plus some other stuff?

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 it's public-facing and uses Bootstrap we'll definitely consider it!

Cool, it is, will submit.

Believe what you want. If they use bootstrap with no tweaking at all, they don't deserve any attention for their design.

I think we need more frameworks like Bootstrap. If people are wanting to simplify design by conforming to a framework, why not give them more choice so we don't end up with a hundred websites which all look like Twitter?

I'm making one right now. But it's not a standard framework, it's a sass framework, so the 'utility classes' are pushed back to css mixins and they take parameters so they are all super flexible. I'm really excited to put it out and it's getting there, but there's a lot of polish left to go.

If anyone is interested in helping out or testing, look me up (my name is jeff escalante) and send me an email.

More frameworks like Bootstrap is not a bad idea. But, if you don't want a hundred websites that look like Twitter, then perhaps the right answer is having a themes that are based on Bootstrap - like what http://wrapbootstrap.com/ and http://bootswatch.com/ are doing.

IMHO, bootstrap is nice for small short-term projects where the developer is making the design decisions.

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.

This site would be great as a Pinterest account, too. It's more difficult to monetize, though.

Built by people uninterested in the craft. It's like JavaScript developers that actually only know jQuery.

There is nothing wrong with being uninterested in the finer details of CSS.

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.

There is something wrong with it if you're going to toot your horn, bragging, and want attention, praise, and free promotion... for what? for copying a couple CSS/JS files into a website?

The guys that toggled the machine code in the console, or soldered commands into the boards sneered at the assembler programmers.

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.

That is like saying I code html/etc in notepad because anyone using anything else is uninterested in the craft.

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.

But don't you understand? You only need to put those 10 hours per button in once, then you grok it, and you're a real developer.

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".

Sounds like a great idea for a new paradigm... I'll call it "pain-oriented programming". As you can imagine, the goal of this paradigm is to induce as much pain in the programmer as possible. The reason is that, as all snobby programmers know, pain = enlightenment. If you have not rescued a Visual Basic project from the pit of despair (as much as Visual Basic code can be rescued), you are not a real developer. If you have not mastered the art of rolling your own XML reader--in Java, no less--you are not a real developer. If you have not written your own PHP class autoloader and associated model-view-controller framework, you are not a real developer.

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.

Hats off to you sir/madam. "Pain Oriented Programming". I truly love it. +1 all around.

I am a sir, and thank you. :)

</sarcasm>

This isn't a religion.

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.

Well said. Is not the purpose of our skills as programmers to make our lives easier? If so, then as long as Bootstrap is built properly then it is the kind of tool that enables us to quit wasting our time on tedium and build more interesting and more useful software.

I love the OPA documentation page.

That is all

Please, no more bootstrap.

I think this site is a perfect showcase of how damaging some libraries and frameworks can be when used by lazy designers or developers.

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.

I feel it's no more of a curse than an OS drawing GUI widgets for me so I don't have to. If I really need to customize things I can, but for now I have a fully working application without lots of fiddling.

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?

I think your mention of OS drawn widgets brings up an interesting point of discussion.

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?

What you might not get is that people used to be as lazy but without the framework. So, you'd get really ugly websites without any good design touch. Bootstrap gives these people a way to have something that doesn't look like shit; still letting more design oriented people to improve and making it stand out.

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.