Only if you're an all access customer. Otherwise it's $149.
I like the Tailwind folks but $149 for Catalyst in its current state is a bit steep.
It's also a friggen preview and uncompleted thing. They could have waited for the whole thing to be done and polished but everyone was barking at them "just release it I don't care if it's not done"
Judging by your previous comments, you're not even a customer of theirs and have very misguided views on the product and it's pricing.
I have a feeling you have a competing product and are just trying to drum up negativity about Tailwind.
edit:// yep, I just checked your history, you're the creator of that nue thingy that is trying to compete with next/astro/nuxt/tailwind/etc all at once.
Any evidence for this claim?
That was the last time I used bootstrap about 2-3 years ago before going all in on Hero Icons, Headless-UI, and css design tokens and utility classes (Tailwind)
Tailwind is neat but I think people get a little too rah-rah about it given the build complexity and integrating with existing codebases.
My point was that a lot of use of bootstrap was through CDNs. Yes, there was plenty of npm downloads also. However comparing tailwind npm downloads vs bootstrap downloads is not a fair comparison of use.
They have different use cases and target audiences. A lot of people want to just chuck a button in a template and have it look in their internal tool that 3 people will see. They likely copied the dist/bootstrap.min.css file and never updated.
It's also likely all the users of server side frameworks like django or ruby on rails never setup npm in those projects, but certainly used bootstrap. It's less likely those projects would use tailwind because you need have a js buildstep for it unless you want to ship 10mb of css.
There's no denying tailwind is popular, but thinking npm is the only way people are getting css frameworks/libraries is flat wrong.
It took many long brain dump sessions, and some help from the U.S. Digital Service and Tailwind themselves.
At the end of the day, Tailwind solved more problems for them than it created.
You wouldn’t think that moving from loading icons via css versus loading them via inline svg’s would make a huge difference; but I found that it can actually reduce a second or two of render time from a legacy and bloated code base.
[1]: https://npmcharts.com/compare/bulma,tailwindcss,bootstrap,ui...
That said, it is disappointing to see recent work all tied to React. I generally prefer Phoenix LiveView (or Rails + Hotwire, etc) over a React/Angular/Vue approach. By tying it to React, they destroy most the value this kit would have otherwise had to me.
They already earned my money, though. I still enthusiastically recommend Tailwind UI to people.
The paid nature makes it hard for the community to fill in that gap, which is a shame. I’d love to collaborate on a Phoenix version of Catalyst.
The Tailwind team created one of the most used CSS frameworks ever and charge nothing for it. The framework needs a revenue stream to enable continued investment. Rails has basecamp. Bootstrap had twitter. React has meta. Tailwind has Tailwind UI.
I find it great value. It's a one-off cost comparable to hiring a designer or front-end developer for a day, and you get a bunch of usable components + future upgrades.
Usually HN isn't as negative about revenue streams for open-source developers.