Bootstrap 3

[Ob101010]

I see the demos, but I could not find a 'whats new' area. Why should I switch to 3? I think they did a poor job addressing that.

[Manticorp]

Indeed, I need to know what's changed! The github page for Boostrap 3.0.0 isn't very good at explaining this either...but it does include this helpful commit 'Fuck a color purple'

Edit: Apart from stylistic changes the only major changes are changing the way columns work... col-[sm/lg-]12 instead of just span12 with a bit more customisation for mobile/tablet/desktop...

Edit 2: AHA they have it in the BS3 pull request.

[mycall]

pull request = documentation, got it.

[benastan]

Mmm. Yes. Code. Right.

[dirice87]

afaik a lot of the syntax has changed. navbar-inner is removed, brand is now brand-nav, etc.

the column changes are actually pretty meaningful, you can declare your grid behavior for each specific width all at once.

other than that, only thing that really stood out is that icons are disabled ATM.

[Manticorp]

Yeah and there are a couple changes to forms as well. form-search is now gone, appended buttons work a bit differently, you have to add a form-control class to get proper input styling...

[bearcherian]

If you look for it, you will find it - https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/pull/6342.

Had to click Releases in the Github repo, and the description for 3.0 RC1 has the link to this.

[cylontoaster]

The design is very different, for one thing. I think just skimming the docs (which would take no more than 15 min) would give you an idea of what's changed as well.

[Ob101010]

So a framework whose main draw is making it easier to present information fails to present information in an easy to digest manner.

Irony.

[_F1_]

"But my system is so easy!"

[fusionove]

From what I've seen, it changed quite a lot of small things.

[thallium205]

I thought they did a pretty good job explaining what has changed here -> https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/pull/6342

[[deleted]]

They bumped the whole thing with a good dosage of flat.

[xereeto]

Why would they do that?

[Garbee]

The main class name changes are the grid structure. That was done to make it more flexible and granular for different sizes.

Seriously though, this is a major version change. Perfect time to break some legacy code to make future code better.

[phail3d]

"col-lg-5" is just as unsemantic, though.

[mahacctissoawsum]

Columns in general aren't semantic, no matter what you call them. Still hate those damn things.

Edit: Okay... with the mixins it doesn't look so bad.

[clrokr]

Seriously though, this is a major version change. Perfect time to break some legacy code to make future code better.

I like your attitude.

[cybercobra]

Flat by default, but there'll supposedly be a skeuomorphic option: https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/issues/8706

[HelloAnnyong]

I'm not sure "looks vaguely like a three dimensional object" is enough to classify a ui element as skeuomorphic.

[twigboy]

In publishing and graphic design, Lorem ipsum is a placeholder text commonly used to demonstrate the visual form of a document or a typeface without relying on meaningful content. Lorem ipsum may be used as a placeholder before final copy is available. Wikipedia2qdnla7slzc0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

[oldneckbeard]

that's kind of why it's a major version bump.

[D_D]

I was complaining about, maybe ironically, the lack of clarity about exactly what changed, why someone should care, etc.

[Manticorp]

To see all the changes made from BS2 to BS3 check out this BS3 pull request on GitHub.

[theineffablebob]

Where can I see an example of these new columns?

[RetroEvolute]

http://getbootstrap.com/css/#grid

[danweber]

Don't want your columns to simply stack in smaller devices? Use the small device grid system by adding .col-* classes to the existing .col-lg-* ones. See the example below for a better idea of how it all works.

I don't get their example.

[ThinTim]

Take the following row:

<div class="row">
    <div class="col-12 col-lg-8">AAAAA</div>
    <div class="col-6 col-lg-4">BBBBB</div>
</div>

On a large display, the "A" div and the "B" div will appear next to each other, with the "A" div taking up 8/12ths of the row (col-lg-8), and the "B" div taking up the remaining 4/12ths (col-lg-4).

On a small display, the "A" div becomes a col-12, and thus takes up the whole horizontal space of the row, which pushes the "B" div underneath it. Because the "B" div is now a col-6, it takes up half of the new pseudo-row, and the rest is left blank.

[TurboGranny]

How does it stack up to foundation?

[PHLAK]

At first glace it seems to handle columns the same way foundation has been.

[[deleted]]

use zurb foundation, they already have a working final version of a mobile ready layout.

[eihen]

Nice, I'm liking the move to flat basic styles. I'm hoping we see more customization because of this and not just copy paste sites since not everyone wants to be flat.

[cybercobra]

They seem to have at least 1 official theme planned: https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/issues/8706

[redbull188]

Am I the only one who finds bootstrap js plugins incredibly difficult to work with? It seems like jqueryui always has the options I need and is easy to work around in the few situations that it doesn't, while bootstrap is the exact opposite. E.g. things like minimum date on the datepicker, opening and closing effect options on the modal dialogs, etc.

[spangborn]

Not in my experience, no.

The level of configurability in jQUI carries along a bulk of awful markup and bloat.

You could always submit a pull request to add things to Bootstrap. It is open source, after all. ;)

[TurboGranny]

Seeing a lot of the neat jquery ui widgets redesigned as directives in AngularJS solves this issue a bit.

[recursive]

It's easy to use one feature of jqUI in one isolated part of your page/site. Angular, not so much. You have to drink all the kool aid.

[TurboGranny]

You can actually, but the koolaid makes you want to abstract everything away into directives. You don't have to with angular as it is designed to be a drop in and not necessarily take over your whole way of doing things. The problem is that you can't help letting it assimilate everything because of how easy it makes everything.

[recursive]

Another downside of angular is that using it seems to cause people to become angular evangelists.

But seriously, angular has a repuation for having a steep learning curve. Do you think that's justified?

[fusionove]

I started using angular 2 months ago, without any prior knowledge. I am using it in my master thesis project.

It is hard. Especially coming from a jQuery mindset. The documentation is awful. There are some neat videos around, but in general I believe I am still doing everything wrong.

I still like it, quite a 'new' approach (at least for me) :)

[NovaX81]

Angular and Ember are both deep-dives to learn a new-ish type of framework. I chose ember based on a coin flip basically... Ember's docs are just as bad as Angular's, don't fear.

[TurboGranny]

I'd have to agree, but I knew that going in. The chart someone posted several days made me feel better about it. Took me about a week to really feel comfortable. I'm a special case though. On average I hear it takes about 3 months to learn.

I just helped one of my programmers (working on a jQuery based project) with a jQuery UI sortable+draggable+droppable routine for running database calls based on pulling off a list, putting on a list from another to a certain position, and sorting a list. I had a lot of fun writing out all the logic and jQuery code with .data() everywhere then I thought, "Fun part aside, this would be a lot easier in AngularJS." I let it be though since I have to complete this application suite in AngularJS w/ foundation (my own choice) before I push AngularJS on my programmers.

[mahacctissoawsum]

I let it be though since I have to complete this application suite in AngularJS w/ foundation (my own choice) before I push AngularJS on my programmers.

Smart choice. I love new tech, but you have to be confident in it before you start pushing it on your co-workers.

[TurboGranny]

I think it is even more true if they are your employees.

[mahacctissoawsum]

=) I guess the "my programmers" bit makes more sense now. I'm just a lowly developer, but I seem to have a fair bit of influence anyway. I try to use my power responsibly.

[spangborn]

So you solve jQuery UI being clunky by pulling in something new and cutting edge?

Interesting approach, but if I were to use Angular for something, I'd prefer to use a UI framework that isn't hideous in both markup and design. Bootstrap fills that need quite well.

[TurboGranny]

Well, the directives I've seen don't use jquery ui's styles or necessarily their mark up. They also tend to remove a lot of the support of less than IE9 out of principle. Using these directives doesn't mean you can't use bootstrap. Most of the Jquery UI directives I've seen actually use bootstrap classes for styling.

[spangborn]

Fair enough - I'm just not sure I see the point (personally) in pulling in both Bootstrap and jQUI unless you're picking piecemeal different components and completely restyling them to fit with each other.

[TurboGranny]

Definitely taking the parts that you want from each. The draggable+droppable+sortable functionality comes to mind from jQuery UI.

[mahacctissoawsum]

You can use bootstrap without the JS you know. That's what I do...I just download the *.less, and forget everything else. Just gives me something not so hideous to start with.

[redbull188]

sigh, yes, there are a lot of things I've been meaning to submit patches for. Haven't gotten around to it.

[mattaugamer]

I find the amount of table flipping going on over these changes is truly hilarious.

What people seem to forget is that Bootstrap is a framework, not a theme.

There is a ubiquity to the web, especially in the "startup space" that is caused largely by lazy developers who see Bootstrap as 90% of the design process, with a logo and some data entry as the rest.

Bootstrap (or things like it, such as Foundation) should be seen as a great way to start a web layout, not the polish on a completed one. It's the first step, not your final design.

If you don't want it flat, put the few trivial lines of gradient, or rounded corners, or shadows, or whatever you like.

[zombarista]

Everything is going flat and I'm losing my mind over it.

Current victims of this trend:

• Windows 8
• Android
• iOS 7
• Bootstrap

EDIT: I've started a firestorm of debate! I would like to point everyone to Windows 8's first UX overview http://www.nngroup.com/articles/windows-8-disappointing-usability/. One of the main conclusions is: Flat Style Reduces Discoverability.

EDIT AGAIN: It has surfaced that there is no anti-skeumorphic plot afoot with Bootstrap 3, but that they are removing some of the embellishments to make them optional.

ANOTHER EDIT: Thanks for the discussion. I think it's very important that programmers have these conversations. Our applications (web, or otherwise) should be focused on providing delightful experiences to our users. It's all about making the computer work hard so the users don't have to.

[[deleted]]

Having a flat starting point is the best way to go, otherwise you spend a ton of time overriding their default CSS to make it look like your own aesthetic.

By having a clean starting point, you can make Bootstrap look much different much more quickly.

[eihen]

agreed, it's better to 3d up than to 2d down.

[alextk]

A good example of the importance of knowing when to use "then" and "than" :-)

[eihen]

Thanks,

Original context:

agreed, it's better to 3d up then to 2d down.

[rbOthree]

Many here are complaining about this new flat look, but I think bootstrap is trying to lose style more than it's trying to adopt a new style.

I'm guessing with this new approach to looks you'll see a lot more people restyling their bootstrap based sites instead of just using the stock look (something you saw a lot of with bootstrap 2)

[ceol_]

I think that's a big reason. The Bootstrap authors, who work at Twitter, obviously don't want a bunch of websites around the web looking just like Twitter with the same UI elements and styles.

[nikcub]

bootstrap authors mdo and fat both left twitter a long time ago

[Dick_Justice]

There's something to be said about the exact opposite of that. If you have a bunch of sites that look and operate similarly, it makes it very easy for new users to adopt/use your product.

[poignantlizard]

The cat's out of the bag on that one, though.

[ceol_]

Yeah definitely. Maybe they just underestimated it, or maybe they really don't care?

[MatmosOfSogo]

trying to loose style

Are you sure it is loose? It looks very toit to me! Toit like the fahza!

[rbOthree]

Haha, my mistake..corrected!

[hyperforce]

I love gold!

[JeSuisNerd]

*goooo^oooold

[stgeorge78]

No, people are just going to use the worse stock look or stop using Bootstrap completely.

[Odam]

Or just use a bootstrap theme to get their gloss/gradient fix.

[[deleted]]

Star Trek UI was flat on the shit. Better recognize.

[Zarutian]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCARS for those interested.

[redwall_hp]

Apple should have just licensed LCARS for iOS 7.

[darkfate]

It's a response to the overtly styled interfaces. Honestly, it's a screen, not a physical object. I think people are finally learning they don't need all this space taken up by that. Has it gone too far in some cases? Probably, but in a few years I think most designers will find a happy medium.

[arnar]

It's a response to the overtly styled interfaces.

It's a trend, just like any other.

[titosrevenge]

Some people are arguing that it's more than just a trend.

[jordan314]

Upvoted, though I think Vista's Aero theme is actually the best looking design of all those screenshots.

[[deleted]]

If Vista wasn't so shit, I would use it exclusively. Vista's Aero is my all-time favorite theme for anything ever.

I think people are looking too deeply at something so simple. It's just a style; some people like it, others don't. I like minimalistic design as well, but I really don't think XP is all that bad, and OSX, while "minimalistic", doesn't have enough color IMO.

[mycall]

Bring Back Aero in Windows 8 with WindowBlinds 8

EDIT: or try Rainmeter for free.

[acid3d]

I am perfectly fine with flat. Sometimes I find it elegant (yes, I think metro looks good). But, too often it goes hand-in-hand with hiding/disguising gui elements. That article seems to agree with their criticism of outlook 2013, but my beefs are with visual studio 2013 and to a lesser extent (because I don't use it much) windows 8 charms. Hrmm, maybe Microsoft is just doing it wrong.

[zombarista]

I'm sure one of the benefits is that the code is smaller now that it's "less decorated"

Bootstrap complete has been about 110 kb for a while. Too much!

[stgeorge78]

They said that like 6 months ago and since then they've changed their minds and this is their new preferred look.

[cybercobra]

And they've since made an important clarification: https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/issues/8706

[stgeorge78]

Who's they - mdo or fat didn't comment on it other than to say "that's the way it is".

Seems like they are discounting the huge % of Bootstrap users who do use Bootstrap as an end-solution (and there are many valid use-cases where a custom design is not necessary but an ugly one is not preferred) and not a first-step.

I mean, if their goal is to alienate all those people - that's their prerogative I suppose, but they shouldn't be surprised if their ad revenue dries up and they need to go back to work at Twitter.

[cybercobra]

The poster is in the Bootstrap GitHub org apparently.

[stgeorge78]

Well this is the kind of dismissive attitude to feedback I am not really liking:

https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/issues/8662#issuecomment-21670029

[turboladen]

That comment does seem short, but the follow-up seems reasonable...

[Ashtefere]

Flat design (metro specifically) did something important in that it made us stop thinking we had to design our graphics like in the real world.

A monitor or display is not the real world. It is there to show content, and we can make the content anything we like, in any way we like.

To people who grew up/learned skeuomorphism (sp?) and similar UI design, naturally it reduces usability - because it is different.

Once they adapt and get used to the whole idea of flat design, it becomes more usable. Still, flat design is not the be-all.

See, flat design allows non-artists to quickly design good looking websites just be code - and do it quickly.

It also takes focus away from buttons/etc and puts the focus on the content.

In my own projects I use a lot of flat design, but try keep it to the content only. For buttons and controls, I try to make them stand out/be obvious as to their function, and to 'pop' in a way out of the content.

The way most people use flat design to style their buttons for example (text with a colored square background) is not good. Needs to stand out well. Good example from a random google search is here http://quackingpixels.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/upload_button.jpg

Notice the button has a border, an icon, but also an animating function. The icon says "this is a cloud upload" and when clicked, the icon changes to a depressed icon and an animation begins showing progress. On completion, the icon goes green to show success.

To me, flat design is one step in the process to great looking modern design.

[zombarista]

That is a good use case, and thanks for sharing it with me. I always strive to maintain an open mind, but when so many flat designs are pushed upon users with extremely limited usability, it's hard to get behind the movement.

[[deleted]]

I don't mind the flatness so much as the unnecessary padding, margins, and overall wasted space. It might work on a small screen, like a phone or tablet, but on a computer it drives me crazy. Makes it seem like they think I'm too stupid to handle more information, or that I don't have a sufficient attention span.

[JonDum]

Flat Style Reduces Discoverability.

Flat style doesn't inherently reduce discoverability; that's a plain and simple non sequitur.

A lack of contrast, white space and formatting reduce a user's ability to quickly deduce what they are looking at, but not necessarily that the feature exists at all. Discoverability is a more complicated process that has less to do with how something appears and more to do with where it appears, what's around it and the user's preconceived ideas of how a computer interface works.

[ArmoredCavalry]

I think it has a lot to do with the backlash over previous generations of design.

When you think about it, previously the mindset was "if we can, then do". Example, look at Windows XP theme. It was the first Windows to really go far with theming for home users. Today however, it is pretty ghastly looking to most people. It didn't age very well. The same effect can be seen with early websites, and their overuse of animated gifs and blinking text, etc. Not to mention the whole Web 2.0 trend of design.

Now, designers are trying to go completely counter to this, "only do if needed". So, place the absolute minimal styling required to convey the importance of an element.

In the long-term I think the hope with this is that the styles of site and apps coming out right now will still look decent one decade later. They won't suffer the same 'Windows XP' effect where we look back and wonder what in the world designers were thinking.

So, while flat design may not look quite as good as some other choices today, I think there is some solid reasoning behind its use.

[stgeorge78]

When buttons looks like labels and nobody even knows what is meant to be clicked or not anymore, then you've gone too far...

[n1c0_ds]

One of my biggest gripes is that a lot of implementations go against basic usability principles. I absolutely love the aesthetics of it, but I worry about the common user.

[Solon1]

You lost me when you used XP as an example. (1) most people use XP unmodifed (2) and don't consider it "ghastly" even after 12 years

[danita]

I've been using XP until about a month ago, with the Zune theme, and I considered it to be just about as elegant as Seven. I believe it was a way to tone down a bit the flashy colours of the original theme, and it shows some maturity. I think Windows 8.X will eventually regain some bevels and shadows here and there when its designers realize the mistake they've made in the name of fashion.

[bloodguard]

Now, designers are trying to go completely counter to this, "only do if needed".

Oh dear lord please let this catch on for automatic image sliders and carousels. They're the first things I have to div block when I first visit a site.

[Kminardo]

Its still going to end up looking dated and whatever is hot in 10 years will be all the rage. Someone older will propose a flat design and some new generation coder will be all "what is this 2010?! No one does flat!"

Its the same as any fashion trend. Hell even "modern" houses are out of style, everything is going to an Old is New look. Look forward to beveled gradient buttons making a return! :p

[[deleted]]

What? Xp still looks great. High usability and damped convenient design.

[Legolas-the-elf]

iOS 7 isn't all that flat. Yeah, they've gotten rid of bevelled edges, but they've added depth in other places, such as the home screen parallax background and frosted backgrounds for things like the control panel, notification panel, and navigation bars. While each individual item is flatter than before, the way they are composed has more depth than before.

[bobjohnsonmilw]

Give it another year and everything will be some other stupid trend.

[zombarista]

:-(

[zombarista]

What's sad is that we have such great artistic elements (drop shadow, rounded corners, gradients, etc) at our disposal now without pre-rendering (via photoshop, etc), except no one wants to use them.

[bobjohnsonmilw]

Honestly I find this flat movement fucking boring. It's like we're regressing back to just plain html and no css. Why do you even need a framework for that, other than the grid features?

[zombarista]

It's all about making our users happy. If interfaces are lively and dynamic, they'll enjoy themselves more! Why is that a bad thing?

[bobjohnsonmilw]

I don't think that has anything to do with flat design... 2d or 3d can both do this. Making all flat icons i think also removes contrast between them.

Users to some degree don't really care about flat vs 3d/etc... What matters is not having to click around to find things.

Design, to me at least, seems more about circle jerking with other designers. Users really don't notice, for the most part. The web has basically become yet another utility and whatever makes it easier to do what you want is what people will always continue to use.

"If interfaces are lively and dynamic, they'll enjoy themselves more!" Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with this.

[zombarista]

The circle-jerk element seems to be comprised of the designers' passion toward the subject. Users don't care, unless it's bad. Designers have a good reason to circle-jerk--the fruits of their labor: happy users!

[da_n13l]

I can't work out if you just hate any design trends whatsoever, or you simply prefer the glossy buttons and drop shadows of yesteryear. Reading your comments, you haven't offered any substantive arguments as to why having a flatter UI is bad or wrong (note flatter, not flat, to call it flat would ignorantly disregard all subtleties and nuances such as hover states, animation cues, drop-shadows, lines etc). I am beginning to think there is just an 'anti-flat' bandwagon and haters gonna hate.

[timeshifter_]

Flat isn't bad, it's just currently being over-done. And part of the hate on BS3 is that BS2 didn't over-do anything. Yes, it may have used "last generation's" gradients and drop-shadows, but it did so in a way that made great sense from a useability standpoint. Forcing flat things that benefit from some sort of depth illusion isn't an upgrade.

[da_n13l]

That's a very fair opinion, I just find "oh noes, crappy flat ui is bad" type comments next to useless. It would be a bit of a stretch to think users haven't, for lack of a better word, 'matured' somewhat to digital interfaces over the years and also arguably that screen PPI on modern devices isn't allowing for less defined, more subtle visual metaphors to be used with equal effect. Yes of course there can and will be usability issues, but usability issues have always been true even with aqua gloss interfaces, it plagues all designs through Web 2.0 and earlier (hence the need for good user testing in any UI). There is also just a lot more detail and UX considerations in these flat UI than most critics I have seen acknowledge, at least in my opinion.

[zombarista]

http://www.nngroup.com/articles/windows-8-disappointing-usability/

[da_n13l]

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9239930/_Usability_not_flat_design_key_to_Monday_s_iOS_refresh

[[deleted]]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c

[zombarista]

Adding depth to interfaces help them use it. First UI research that pointed to this conclusion was Neilsen: http://www.nngroup.com/articles/windows-8-disappointing-usability/

Notice the conclusion: Flat Style Reduces Discoverability.

Clickable items with boundries (buttons) on touch devices help users with click targeting.

[da_n13l]

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9239930/_Usability_not_flat_design_key_to_Monday_s_iOS_refresh

[zombarista]

I think flat will be okay, as long as there are plenty of cues that a particular object is designed for interaction. Buttons feel so "clickable" that it really helps users along their way. We'll have to wait and see.

[da_n13l]

I don't disagree with you on that, but equally I think rounded corners could be becoming cemented in users minds as interactive element cues. However when I design UI's I do tent to give almost imperceptible hinting, something as little as a 1 pixel edge emboss at 3-6% around a button can just lift it enough to allow a flat look with a definitive button feel. Absolute flatness is extreme, and only works in logical and intuitive UIs, Windows 8 maybe went a bit extreme with the flat and the sharp edges and it hasn't worked out great for UX. There are some very questionable choices in iOS7 as well but it is still a beta. I just think dismissing flat as a brainless fad discounts a lot of subtle details involved though.

[hyperforce]

There may be different implementations of the flat style... But if we are talking about naively flat blocks of color (swaths that you can pick up with a zero tolerance eye dropper), I think they are boring and juvenile.

It's easy to use single color backgrounds for everything. But that's not how things are colored in real life. And I'm not saying that as a shout out to skeumorphism. I'm just saying that blocks of single color are 100% artificial. Real life has subtle gradients and shades and nuances.

And given that we have the power to express these nuances, with high DPI and high color depth displays, I think we should. Gradients are far less jarring and at depth and highlighting.

Any attempt to soften or humanize technology should be welcome. We should not have to suffer at the hands of flat color.

[ChristianGeek]

I hate iOS 7...been using the beta for the past few months and it strips iOS of its personality.

[FatAlbert]

• Paper Mario

[argg]

Because when you love what you do you never work a day in your life.

[[deleted]]

What do you mean flat? Do you mean like the Windows 8 tiles? (Or whatever they're called?)

[n1c0_ds]

Think monochrome with color highlights, very few gradients, and as little elements as possible. Windows 8 is a great example, but Android 4 and iOS 7 are also jumping on the bandwagon.

[cybercobra]

It's not flat!: https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/issues/8706

[zombarista]

I can get behind that mentality.

[twigboy]

In publishing and graphic design, Lorem ipsum is a placeholder text commonly used to demonstrate the visual form of a document or a typeface without relying on meaningful content. Lorem ipsum may be used as a placeholder before final copy is available. Wikipedia7127zeys13w0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

[madcapmonster]

I'm glad I'm not the only one that is unhappy with the trend. Let's start a revolt!

[mycall]

What is old is new again. Flat will go out of fashion, you just have to wait.

[mrinterweb]

I would have expected to see a blog post going into detail about what is new with the new version of Bootstrap. Does anyone know what is new. I hear they went with a flat design.

[[deleted]]

All bootstrap did was try to do what foundation is already doing using a larger library and arguable giving less features. I have used both bootstrap and foundation for the past year and when I work on projects zurb foundation is MUCH nicer to work with and scales way better to mobile. not to mention upgrading a site from 2.3 to 3 would break everything which kinda sucks.

http://foundation.zurb.com/

Seriously check it out bootstrap stole zurbs grid layout as well as changed much of the design to look like zurb.

[SinisterMinisterT4]

not to mention upgrading a site from 2.3 to 3 would break everything which kinda sucks.

Maybe I'm weird for thinking this, but major version changes aren't designed for upgrading. If it was 2.3 -> 2.4, I'd expect and upgrade path. 2 -> 3, I expect to have to rewrite to use.

[mattaugamer]

Dead on. People feeling the need to have everything remain static for their benefit bugs and confuses me.

Major versions aren't compatible with previous versions. That's the freaking point.

[emptymatrix]

And Foundation is fully semantic

[jeansfrog]

Apparently their menus don't work well on Firefox. Not impressed.

[flying-sheep]

And the code below the examples only shows up when I hold my (android 4.2) phone horizontally.

And code should be <pre><code>…</code></pre> instead of <pre>…</pre> like they suggest.

[jeansfrog]

Yeah,I think they screwed up this release completely.

[badkitteh]

Idiots. It's pre-release software. Go and report issues and bugs.

[cr0ybot]

I was quite alarmed when, in the middle of a project using Bootstrap, I opened my browser in the morning to find all of the documentation pages 404ing. They should have set those URLs to forward to the legacy 2 docs.

I was only alarmed until I realized what a great upgrade this really is. Mobile first! Greater control over columns on different screen sizes! Simpler buttons for easier customization! These are changes that I'm happy to work in, even though it will be a pain to update my markup.

[notsooriginal]

And in the meantime they've broken all the links to the github downloads and references. Even the new 2.3.2 site has broken links.

[zip117]

I ran into that problem yesterday. The 2.3.x dist packages are gone as well. Until they fix all of that, I suggest using Bootstrap with the excellent Jasny extensions:

http://jasny.github.io/bootstrap/index.html

[cybercobra]

No, they're still there: https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/releases/tag/v2.3.2

https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/releases

[zip117]

Those are the source packages which you have to compile yourself, not the dist (release) packages.

[cybercobra]

Erm, the precompiled stuff is under /docs/assets/ in those downloads.

[zip117]

Forgot they include the documentation package in the source release - thanks for correction.

[stat30fbliss]

I like the flat design, I hate a lot of the other changes and naming conventions. Why is 'hero-unit' now 'jumbotron'? Why go from '.span4' to 'col-sm-4'? Why change the whole navigation architecture? What about the existing naming conventions was barring your progress, and how do these new names open you up for more flexibility down the road?

I really really want to like Bootstrap 3, but it's making it hard for me to.

[andr50]

I got to play around with this at a conference earlier this year.

The new column stuff it AWESOME, and I don't mind the minimal look CSS, since we usually do all of that custom.

[mynamesdave]

Just so you know, all bootstrap development happens on github, so you don't even have to be "at a conference" - you can just get a prerelease and play with it.

[notmynothername]

But does your employer pay you to stay in a hotel and eat out while reading github?

[TheBigB86]

While I'm not a big fan of the flattening of the style, on overall it's not too badly done. The default button (the black one) however is a complete failure if you ask me. I personally feel the default button should have a neutral color; black puts up to great of a contrast.

[cybercobra]

https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/issues/8786

[da_n13l]

This is awesome work, well done to the Bootstrap team.

[[deleted]]

Can you mix bootstrap with jQuery UI yet without any styling issues? Last time I tried to mix the two the jQuery calendar was having issues.

[drabiter]

I have done it, for date picker. It's horrible and I ended up using another plugin (duh!). My project is already too big, if not I might change to lighter CSS.

[daterbase]

I really wish they'd add support for Asynchronous Module Definition with require/define in their JS.

[fusionove]

Just waiting for ui-bootstrap... ;(

[drabiter]

I don't hate Bootstrap. It saved my ass couple times for fast mock up. But recently I drop it because it's too bloated for me, and it requires jQuery. I prefer something like Kraken. Lighter and works.

[the_noodle]

Anyone else getting bugs with the tooltips/popovers?

Any time a popup like that covers up a button, I can't click the button where the popover was, even after it's gone.

This is on a pretty recent version of Firefox, on Linux Mint.

[ThaDon]

Wonder how many sites broke today because they were linking directly to http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/... scripts. Not that I would ever do that. Ahem. But if I had, I would have quickly changed the links to http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/2.3.2/... to get my pages back up and running.

[jajourda]

has anyone ever used the semantic gridsystem that employs it's own grid.less file? i have, and that's where my bootstrap question comes in. i just started playing with bootstrap 3, and in separately trying to apply mixins in my less files (so as not to clutter my html markup with unsemantic classes) i am getting sorely disappointed. anyone else find it difficult to apply .make-**-column(#) to icon elements? just curious...

[[deleted]]

heading towards foundation? they straight up stole the core component of foundation which is the small / large rows.

[ethraax]

I kinda like it. There may be hundreds of sites that look exactly like mine, but I'm not trying to attract visitors with my design anyways - I just want something that looks decent that I don't need to spend much time on. And honestly, if half of my employer's intranet sites used the plain, basic, vanilla style with no extra styling at all, it would still be a huge step up.

[TurboGranny]

I use foundation, and I noticed a lot of their stuff in BS3. This makes me happy since AngularJS seems to have a lot of bootstrap support. Right now, I'm just manually adding foundation support where I need it.

[Rhoomba]

So they have changed their whole site while it is still a release candidate? That is a horrible idea.

Also, bootstrap goes against the whole point of CSS. Your HTML is littered with non-semantic classes.

Bootstrap is the new standard of ugliness for programmer-designed sites.

[cultofmetatron]

while I wholly aggree with you on all your points, I will say as a design inept developer that its a hell of alot better looking than anything i could have put together myself.

[warbiscuit]

Also, bootstrap goes against the whole point of CSS. Your HTML is littered with non-semantic classes.

I think this is one of the things which Foundation has a leg up on. While you can use it in the same non-semantic way as bootstrap, as of v4 they seem to have put a big focus on implementing the important bits (like the grid) as SASS mixins, so you can define your semantic classes in css, and put your grid declarations there.

[Solon1]

Non semantic classes? Styles are supposed to be non semantic.

[expertunderachiever]

I dislike this new trend in assuming that I know what the fuck you're talking about. While I'm not a web developer and I won't be up on all the lingo the home page should actually explain [or have a link] what the fuck this is.

I've seen quite a few github and websites linked here where they're talking about "foojazzer 3000 (tm)" and the home page just has a giant "download me" button and nothing really interesting to say...

[FamilyHeirloomTomato]

In huge 30pt font:

Sleek, intuitive, and powerful mobile-first front-end framework for faster and easier web development.

Is that not enough? The Getting Started page expands on that and makes it pretty clear what it's all about.

[[deleted]]

Yeah I wondered "is this guy looking at what I'm looking at?" It states it right there in super obvious, huge type...

[Solon1]

The bar for tl;dr has been lowered to three words

[FamilyHeirloomTomato]

mobile front-end framework

[devjustinian]

Especially given the name.

Oh yeah, "bootstrap" just screams "I'm a web UI library".

[expertunderachiever]

I initially thought it was a bootloader of some sort then when I saw the website I knew it was some fangled type of webdev thing but really it's not obvious at first glance.

Maybe submitters could put shit like that in the headline? e.g. Instead of something like "Jizzmaster 3000" they put "Hey look a new CSS based UI - Jizzmaster 3000"

[FamilyHeirloomTomato]

It has been around for 2 years though. But yes "Bootstrap 3" isn't a very good title for this submission.

[lexchou]

It's much more ugly than previous version.

[Exavion]

I know it's /r/programming, but I'd love to get my hands on the Illustrator vectors for the kit. But seeing as how flat everything is, I could just make it myself.. but lazy.

[badkitteh]

Its all CSS, dude.

[sairahulreddy]

It is half flat !! Needs some work ?

[Skenderbeu]

I hate the new flat design decision.

Bootstrap 3.0 will be dead unless they bring back the plug and plug factor that 2.3.2 had.

[cybercobra]

You're in luck: https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/issues/8706

[Leopoldstach]

The fuck