Bootstrap [Locked]

[ALsp]

Yeah. It's certainly controversial. In my opinion, the entire subject of frameworks is controversial... But I think it's really a fabrication born of a want for instant gratification, regardless of the price. I've heard people on this forum make outrageous claims as to the benefits of using Bootstrap and its market acceptance - often in an attempt to claim that it is "the choice" of professionals. While my candor probably overshadows my CSS skills - especially in this particular forum - I believe Eric Meyer is still widely considered a master with CSS. So, I thought this post he recently made was quite telling:

https://hashnode.com/post/i-am-eric-a-meyer-ask-me-anything-ciomnbpxy003rmz5330u90oqb#cip79vpkr07rnx...

You have to read between the lines a bit, and you need to understand that Eric's job calls for a fair amount of diplomacy, as opposed to my hammer approach 🙂

By again, I have to bring it to the attention of average Dreamweaver users, that while Adobe might need to squeeze a page layout system into Dreamweaver, I understand that they do not employ serious web coders and had to go with something off the shelf. But for folks that portray themselves as experts on this forum to openly endorse the use of Bootstrap... I think it's unconscionable.

[BenPleysier]

Reading 'between the lines', our friend Eric, as a very proficient coder, would not have used a framework and I find it difficult to understand that he has an opinion about frameworks. Like, I have never driven a Ferrari, but I would not recommend for or against you purchasing one . I think it is far too bloated with its top speed exceeding  370 Km/h and capable of reaching 100 Km/h in under 3 secs.

I am digressing. Another learned member of the web development fraternity is Joseph Lowery, shows us how to make an existing site responsive with new capabilities in Dreamweaver CC, using Bootstrap​. He is aiming this at the average Dreamweaver user, not at proficient coders.

[ALsp]

If that's your argument, then I rest my case. Thank you, Ben, for missing the point entirely 🙂

[ALsp]

our friend Eric,

Really?

And you do realize Joe Lowery makes his living writing books about how to use Dreamweaver and how to use Wappler, now, if I'm not mistaken. So, I would fully expect that he would devote a considerable amount of time to Bootstrap. That's the way business works.

Actually, he even marketed an extension through my company many years ago. But I think that was before you descended onto the Dreamweaver scene.

[BenPleysier]

ALsp  wrote

our friend Eric,

Really?

And you do realize Joe Lowery makes his living writing books about how to use Dreamweaver and how to use Wappler, now, if I'm not mistaken. So, I would fully expect that he would devote a considerable amount of time to Bootstrap. That's the way business works.

Actually, he even marketed an extension through my company many years ago. But I think that was before you descended onto the Dreamweaver scene.

I am not sure what you are implying here. We all make a living from doing something, and I am sure that I know how business works. This all sounds very condescending to me.

[pziecina]

First of all, Erics posts are 3+ years old, add to that the simple fact we have been here before, (numerous times) I think all opinions have been covered.

Untill someone from Adobe, (not acp's or anyone else) can tell us exactly what type of person uses Dw, any meaningful discussion to inform users to use bootstrap or not, is just an individuals opinion.

I think, (not know) that the typical Dw CC user is someone who has a CC subscription, (so thinks, "Dw is provided, so I will use it") or a student who gets it cut price, and uses it because the course requires it. Very few use Dw in a serious buisness way, as full time developers, (or maybe I am wrong?).

Before ACP's jump in, and say they use Dw CC. They should also say if they use an older version than the current one, if they use any other program, (and why). Also remember that ACP's get a free CC subscription, (so are not paying for it).

[osgood_]

Scares me that an educational establishment might consider DW to be a serious means of teaching web development if as you say its a 'requirement' for the course.

[pziecina]

There have been a few posts that say they use Dw because the course says to do so.

Even if the course is for graphic designers, I have known them to include web design as part of the course. So such students may also use Dw, and not know that they then become unemployable if they do not code, but use bootstrap or Dw extensions, (sorry AL, but someone learning should first learn to code).

[ALsp]

Even if the course is for graphic designers, I have known them to include web design as part of the course. So such students may also use Dw, and not know that they then become unemployable if they do not code, but use bootstrap or Dw extensions, (sorry AL, but someone learning should first learn to code).

I wholeheartedly agree that web designers should learn to code, which makes extensions tools for augmentation. I've always held that position.

[rayek.elfin]

osgood_  wrote

Scares me that an educational establishment might consider DW to be a serious means of teaching web development if as you say its a 'requirement' for the course.

Then you will be happy to know that in my experience, no student or instructor of which I am aware of in the past decade were using DW either to teach web dev or code. Excepting one case (an instructor friend of mine) who reluctantly made the switch to PHPStorm and Sublime 7 years ago.

This includes groups of graphic design students that had to be taught basic html and css, as well as front-end and full stack development courses.

Nowadays absolutely no-one I know in instructor circles teaches with DW. No student uses it. It's Atom, Brackets, Sublime, Visual Studio, Netbeans, Eclipse, and other code editors or IDEs. Dreamweaver? No.

[BenPleysier]

ALsp  wrote

If that's your argument, then I rest my case. Thank you, Ben, for missing the point entirely 🙂

Could you please explain your point seeing that I am missing it.

Edit: FYI, I wasn't arguing anything, I was merely commenting on the article. What case are you talking about?

[rayek.elfin]

As far as Bootstrap, Foundation, and other front-end frameworks go: in my opinion don't use them unless you have good knowledge of front-end dev, and only if the situation calls for it, which is often a personal or team's call to make.

I think Bootstrap and other front-end frameworks are deceptive in that it might SEEM as if it makes things easier for a complete beginner or novice coder, but never forget these frameworks were conceived by experienced dev teams to simplify THEIR project workflow. Not to provide a crutch to be relied on by front end coders with a lack of foundational skills.

Relying on one of these for pure visual web development by novices (and the DW devs) is a logical assumption to make, but one that in practice only hurts them in the long run.

Dare I say this? Better to completely hide the code from non-coders in this case. Allow them to make a mess, and focus on visuals alone. Like Muse. Non-coders by choice are not going to want to learn html and css anyway.

[Ben M]

I think the debate of using Dreamweaver is the same as using a framework. DW comes off as confused and bloated much like a framework. Working mostly with larger organizations lately, most of the need to use a framework was not because it was the best choice, but it was the fastest option. And it gets even more bloated once you add another stylesheet on top of bootstrap to be brand approved.  Knowing what they do, the only time I typically recommend them professionally is when you are working within Marketing Automation platforms. They are a bad blend of web HTML editors and code restrictions that make a normally coded website, otherwise too much of a pain to workaround. So deploying a framework with externally hosted CSS/JS makes for quick deployment of pages.

As far as DW is concerned, I have the latest version running on my machine, but to say I can use it exclusively is just near impossible. First, FTP has been a horrid experience for quite some time so I am a HUGE Transmit fan. Unfortunately I am yet to find an equally viable competitor on the Windows side.  For code, a lot of the time I boot up Brackets because DW is loaded with stuff I don't need and Live View's constant saving never really worked as expected so I typically still found myself in code view or design view or a quick approximation as I may not always have a 2nd monitor plugged in and switching between a browser and DW can be cumbersome.

Personally speaking, I don't think DW today is much different from where it was a few years ago other than support for CMS platforms like Wordpress that IMO, brought in the wrong audience to DW. They tried to sell that it could work with a CMS and the wrong people read the marketing material.  Then there is the lack of database support since it was dropped, and technologies that change so fast DW cannot keep up (ie: node.js).

[ALsp]

I think the debate of using Dreamweaver is the same as using a framework

Actually, the real point I've been trying to raise on this forum is that the problem is not Bootstrap. It's the Adobe experts who lead "average" Dreamweaver users into believing that Bootstrap is the defacto way to build a web page. Dreamweaver is a perfect coding environment for beginners and it should be touted as such. Bootstrap is not the answer to the question "How do I create a web page in Dreamweaver." The upper crust of coders do not use Dreamweaver, and Adobe (along with several ACPs) is steering code newbies to Bootstrap? That is unconscionable.

We should be teaching people how to code. Perhaps some of the experts would not do too well cooking from scratch?

[BenPleysier]

What is wrong with the following remarks:

• Bootstrap is a free front-end framework for faster and easier web development
• Bootstrap includes HTML and CSS based design templates for typography, forms, buttons, tables, navigation, modals, image carousels and many other, as well as optional JavaScript plugins
• Bootstrap also gives you the ability to easily create responsive designs
• Used on 18% of all websites.
• Between 52% and 72% market share amongst frameworks.
• The most popular code repo in Github.
• Used on all Joomla sites.
• Used on 20% of Drupal 8 sites.
• You can file Bootstrap alongside other giants of the web such as PHP and WordPress. Many people love them and many people love to hate them. But they are massively popular and are foundational pillars of the web.

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote

What is wrong with the following remarks:

• Bootstrap is a free front-end framework for faster and easier web development
• Bootstrap includes HTML and CSS based design templates for typography, forms, buttons, tables, navigation, modals, image carousels and many other, as well as optional JavaScript plugins
• Bootstrap also gives you the ability to easily create responsive designs
• Used on 18% of all websites.
• Between 52% and 72% market share amongst frameworks.
• The most popular code repo in Github.
• Used on all Joomla sites.
• Used on 20% of Drupal 8 sites.
• You can file Bootstrap alongside other giants of the web such as PHP and WordPress. Many people love them and many people love to hate them. But they are massively popular and are foundational pillars of the web.

1. Bootstrap is a free front-end framework for faster and easier web development'

It's not faster or easier in my opinion. Well it might be slightly IF and only IF you are prepared to use the default style settings (no-one uses those). The amount of time trouble shooting bloated html code or reverse engineering someone elses obtuse css will negate any such 'faster' development. Unfortunately short sighted developers only think of the 'now' not the 'future'. Those that pull those short-sighted developers strings only think of the financial rewards for themselves not their customers or their developers job satisfaction.

2. Bootstrap includes HTML and CSS based design templates for typography, forms,  buttons, tables, navigation, modals, image carousels and many other, as  well as optional JavaScript plugins'

All which without question use more html code and more css and more javascript than a bespoke solution which make everything harder to trouble shoot and adds redundancy to the website, which is not good practice. (or wasn't 'until the boot(strap) fits' - sorry about the pun - then poor developers decided steamlining a websites code as much as possibe, was no longer important after years saying it damn well was.)

3. Bootstrap also gives you the ability to easily create responsive designs

So does Flexbox or Grid, with far less code. There's no containers or rows or any other redundant code that Bootstrap requires to work but other more steramlined solutions don't.

4. Used on 18% of all websites.

If true that means 82% of websites dont use it.

5. Between 52% and 72% market share amongst frameworks.

So with that disparity 20% - its not likely to be nearly accurate. Only those that use a framework will care about the popularity amongst frameworks, certainly no-one who is arguing why they should not be used.

7. Used on all Joomla sites. 8. Used on 20% of Drupal 8 sites

Jooma and Drupal are heavy weight CMS's which would more than likely (or should be) used for heavy-weight websites and if anywhere that is exactly where Bootstrap belongs, where a dev-team is involved. Thats what it was originally developed for Twitter, not your average website app, by any means

9. You can file Bootstrap alongside other giants of the web such as PHP and  WordPress. Many people love them and many people love to hate them. But  they are massively popular and are foundational pillars of the web.

Well I cant argue with that, its a matter of choice what you choose to use, hopefully based on your own experience of having explored other options, rather than just 'forced' into a workflow through inexperience or even someone elses decision what you will use.

[BenPleysier]

Thank you for your opinions, but I was asking for facts that refute my remarks.

At this stage, I am inclined to say that the popularity of Bootstrap dictates that it cannot be wiped away with mere emotional arguments.

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote

Thank you for your opinions, but I was asking for facts that refute my remarks.

It is a fact that less code can be deployed to produce a modal, slideshow, navbar etc than produced by the Bootstrap default components. Are you disputing that?

BenPleysier  wrote

At this stage, I am inclined to say that the popularity of Bootstrap dictates that it cannot be wiped away with mere emotional arguments.

No emotional argument used, just years of coding experience.

[ALsp]

At this stage, I am inclined to say that the popularity of Bootstrap dictates that it cannot be wiped away with mere emotional arguments.

Which proves that either you are a Bootstrap evangelist, rather than a Dreamweaver evangelist, and very likely that you are incapable or unwilling to teach someone how to write code.

[BenPleysier]

Actually, it is because of Dreamweaver that I decided to swap Foundation (which I still regard as the better of the two) for Bootstrap. To say that Bootstrap negates my use of Dreamweaver is fanciful.

[ALsp]

Actually, it is because of Dreamweaver that I decided to swap Foundation (which I still regard as the better of the two) for Bootstrap. To say that Bootstrap negates my use of Dreamweaver is fanciful.

You missed the point. Again.

Do you not even see that giving up something you prefer for something inferior just because Adobe stuffed it onto Dreamweaver, is not something to be proud of?

Do you not understand what you're implying about yourself? And please don't ask me to explain because it's kind of obvious and I'd rather not waste an hour composing a couple of sentences that explain it while not being insulting.

[ALsp]

Thank you for your opinions, but I was asking for facts that refute my remarks.

With all due respect, I think your quest for facts could be turned around on you. Citing statistics in an oral argument begs subsequent fact-checking, but citing stats in a written argument should include proper references to the source of the facts. Evidence-based discourse is dying faster than Dreamweaver, but there's no reason to ignore it completely

[BenPleysier]

I must apologise for missing the point once again. In my warped mind I thought that we were discussing Bootstrap as the title of the topic seems to suggest. All of a sudden it has become a personal attack on me. To make it less confusing, please change the title to 'let's attack Ben'

[ALsp]

I must apologise for missing the point once again. In my warped mind I thought that we were discussing Bootstrap as the title of the topic seems to suggest. All of a sudden it has become a personal attack on me. To make it less confusing, please change the title to 'let's attack Ben'

You're avoiding the issue and I'm not attacking you. It only seems that that way because you're arguments are not based on what you seem to be looking for: Facts.

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote

I must apologise for missing the point once again. In my warped mind I thought that we were discussing Bootstrap as the title of the topic seems to suggest. All of a sudden it has become a personal attack on me. To make it less confusing, please change the title to 'let's attack Ben'

Not sure you're doing yourself any favours Ben with remarks like below:

'I decided to swap Foundation (which I still regard as the better of the two) for Bootstrap'

Which implies to me you consider you are using something less superior now for coding to what you were previously, probably just because its include in Dreamweaver or Wappler, both which don't have support for Foundation out of the box. I'm not sure that's a very sound basis for deciding what's a good option, its more based on convenience, not because its the best or even near the best option.

As you say there will always be advocates of front-end frameworks and those against them. I think if you work in a fast paced environment always under pressure from those pulling your strings its difficult to have a focused opinion - you just do the job youre asked to do with the tools/workflows you're asked to use and if that entails using frameworks you have no choice other than lose your job, which most cannot afford to do.

It still doesnt make it a good option though, just one which addresses the issues of how cheap can this be, will Fred be able to handle the job if Paul suddenly dies etc - quality is not considered, its quantity and the least time that usually counts. I guess I've just never been an admirer of automated processes being a creative person. I really admire those with craftsmen skills which is sadly dying out due to human consumption of cheap and cheerful, with very little pride and job satisfaction left in what one does these days.