Twitter Bootstrap’s benifits and pitfalls
I see Bootstrap’s Twitter framework being used more and more by developers and I’m still striving to understand how it can be accepted as a complete and robust solution that can be released when production is ready.
From an overview, it’s a framework for developers who don’t know how to build a standard, reusable, scalable front-end solution, and use it as an easy way out. It looks like a good way for back-end developers with limited front-end knowledge to create a seemingly reasonable UI. There are some useful elements, but in my view, it is only really acceptable for the work of MVP (the minimum applicable product) since a certain degree of hacking within the framework is required to allocate it for the desired purpose.
Here are some of the benefits developers find useful:
- Create a fast layout (stable, flexible, and responsive)
- Create a template quickly
- Everything is instantly the same
- Business network system
Let’s take a look at some pitfalls in a little more detail:
It does not follow best practices
One of the main problems I face with Twitter Bootstrap is that you end up with many unnecessary chapters of DOM elements. This usually means that the presentation is no longer separate from the content. Many front end developers will find this annoying, as it makes scalability, reuse, and maintenance much more difficult. Twitter Bootstrap also creates problems with gradual optimization, as presentation and interactivity are no longer independent of content.
Conflicts with the current site icon
It is heavy
No SASS support
Another point of contention, and certainly a problem bothering me from using Bootstrap is that it is built with less and does not offer any original support for Compass and SASS. Little is fine and definitely has advantages. But SASS is better! And, with a frame like Compass on top, there’s no need to use it. There are some solutions available, but just outside the box, you’ll have to do without a little.
My website looks like everyone else!
Twitter Bootstrap is growing in popularity all the time, meaning that the world and its wife will be using it. While your design can be further customized, you may find that time constraints compel you to stick to a lot of Ready Bootstrap pattern. This can create many similar, memorable, public websites. Although Twitter Bootstrap is fast and easy to implement, creativity is often compromised as a result. Creative designs that challenge conventions can be difficult to implement in an organized Bootstrap environment.
Other disadvantages of using Bootstrap
Many users complained about the bootstrap.js file and how it does not use the semi-colon. This can cause problems when using assembly and pressure tools such as JSMin and RequireJS. The use of semi-dots is not part of the JS standards but in my view it is best to use them mainly due to the inconvenience it can cause and can make modifying the source code a task more difficult than it should be.
Visitors do not take your website seriously
Some of the most skeptical and cautious internet users may question the legitimacy of the site using the default Bootstrap mode. By not allocating enough time to customize patterns, some users may start to consider Bootstrap sites as untrustworthy.
Overall, Twitter Bootstrap is good for getting something up and running fast, with minimal front end development knowledge and is acceptable for an MVP that isn’t released as production quality. However, it can become very easy to shoot your foot, by thinking that you’re getting something for nothing, just to find out later down the line that is causing more work or having to hack to customize it according to your needs.