To me, frameworks are such utter and complete nonsense I wrote an entire article on my newest website about what steaming piles of manure they are.

Scripting frameworks were bad enough -- but the level of mouth-breathing stupidity required to see anything remotely resembling a benefit from these corpulent overblown frameworks? I can only conclude that I am greatly underestimating the ignorance of my fellow man; something that if you asked my friends about they'd say was impossible.

They encourage you to use more separate files resulting in more handshakes, typically start you out with three times the code your entire HTML+CSS+SCRIPTS should total before you've even done anything, and by relying on presentational use of classes drags you so far back in methodology you might as well go back to using HTML 3.2 filled with font and center tags further doped to the gills with outdated attributes like align, bgcolor and border! Admittedly, I say the same thing about the style tag and common use of the style attribute...

Which of course such broken methodology and ignorant development techniques are why people waste 50-100k for every 1k of plaintext on their site now, resulting in multi-megabyte trainwrecks build from dozens if not hundreds of files to do the job of 72k or less in 3 files!

Then, SOMEHOW these ignorant fools writing all this extra code often using cryptic presentational classes have the stones to call it EASIER?!? BULLCOOKIES!!! More code, based on more code, that makes it more complex and more cryptic... is easier. Tell me another one Josephine!

Generally speaking, the only way you could think things like YUI, Bootstrap, Blueprint, Grid960, jQuery, mooTools or any of these other developmentally stunted development methods provides anything of value is a failure to know enough about HTML, CSS, Semantics, Accessibility or even how web pages are transmitted between servers and clients to be making rational informed choices on the subject; much less be qualified to flap your gums about it!

There's a reason I call it bootcrap, as my advice is usually that developers find a stick to scrape that off with before they track it all over their website's carpets!

But again there's a reason I say 98%+ of websites have no legitimate excuse to have more than four to six dozen K of HTML, CSS and scripts COMBINED for a single page, much less more than 48k of CSS for an ENTIRE WEBSITE apart from utter and complete developer ineptitude!

cutcodedown.com/article/HTML_CSS_and_JS_frameworks

BTW guys, that's some really shoddy use of word-wrap:break-word here...

I don't use a framework. They come with lots of bloat, sometimes cause issues, and end up overridden anyways. I can create from scratch quicker than I can fix frameworks.

As many has said, depends on the project you're working on. The good part is that we have preprocessors to the rescue ;) using SASS (which I prefer) or LESS, you can use the important part of the framework, like grid system or resets, and add a plus bonus with your own code. You can always use 'uncss', so you can delete the parts of the framework that are bloating your project. Regards

As someone who works in house for a SaaS company, we have been migrating away from Bootstrap and to our own framework that we have built on top of Bourbon, which is sort of a framework for building your own framework.

We did this for two reasons, primarily.

First, we didn't want to carry the weight of the entire framework - both CSS and JS - on every page. Yes, I know you can pick and choose, but for us, it was easier to build up to what we needed rather than eliminate down.

And even if we were to cherry picked, we would still be left with bloat. Take the grid, for example. We only need maybe four or five layouts, almost all of them based around breaking the page in to thirds. Why should I carry the code for all the other column layouts if I only need a couple?

This leads to the second reason, which is rolling our own allowed us to customize to our needs specifically, as opposed to either living what we were given or having to hack around it.

For instance, our modals look the way we wanted them to look, using the class names that make sense to us. Bootstrap in particular can be a bit overly tag heavy in my opinion. And overriding something like a modal can be a significant investment - one that has the chance to break every time you upgrade Bootstrap.

So we roll our own, using the BEM naming structure and Bourbon (and its related libraries) as our helpers. Does this mean we have to do a bit more hand holding with people who are not as experienced in the front end area? Absolutely. But that is a cost we are willing to pay to ensure that the front end code adheres to the guidelines we want to follow.

All that being said, Bootstrap and Foundation are great if you want to just throw something together quickly. Rolling your own takes time and a solid understanding of where the overall design is headed. For prototyping or even getting the first version of something out quickly, you really cannot beat a framework. The benefits in those situations easily outweigh the costs.

But if you have the team and the right situation (long term maintenance of an app), I suggest you consider taking the time to do it yourself.

Theres's a lot of frameworks out there for frond end stuff. I've used for many years Bootstrap, and once or twice Foundation. In my humble opinion those for me are good, but not good enough. Personally Semantic-UI is the best out there.

I have used both Foundation and Bootstrap in addition to other more light weight frameworks. More recent projects I've opted to forego mainstream frameworks in favor of smaller grid only solutions. Mainly because the project(s) don't need the extra overhead that comes with many of the frameworks in play right now.

I use a framework of my own, 90% based on Pocketgrid http://arnaudleray.github.io/pocketgrid/ because its laughable light and extremely powerfull. Its easy to use and makes it possible to accomplish everything I want to

I personally use Foundation on some of my projects. I've found it the most easy to understand from the beginning. Nonetheless I think there's value in creating your own little framework and file structure. I've developed my own by grabbing concepts from different frameworks and tools. It has really sped up my development time and allows me to better understand my css files. Whatever works best for you!

Riot.JS for the win! I'm a hardcore Riot user and I love it but I'm not the monthly fangirl type, I'm using it for over a year now

I'm still kind of a beginner in web design so Bootstrap works well for me...but I do also find myself wasting a lot of time searching sites like bootsnipp.com for the "standard way of implementing this feature", when in fact there isn't any. It also means that I'm not so confident about writing my own code and rely too much on copy-pasting.

The full Bootstrap is also quite heavy—and I notice this more because I'm on a slow Internet connection. It'll probably help if I compile it using only the components I need, but I've been too lazy to do it yet 😛

Still, I find Bootstrap useful to help me finish projects quickly. I'm trying not to get over-dependent on it, though. Right now I'm playing with the minimal Skeleton framework (getskeleton.com) and trying to write as much of the styles as possible on my own.

But, to answer the question "do I use Bootstrap?" the answer is still: Yes.

It always depends on the project, And to use a framework or not is an important decision to take.

A Framework easily adds up several hundred kB of space to your project and as @Robert mentioned, if you're not using most of features the framework is providing then it's a waste.

My suggestion is, if you think the project is big enough and you need the relevant features that the framework is providing, then go for it. Otherwise, make a little style of your own and use it.

You can also take a part of the framework that is relevant to your project(like grid system for example) and leave the rest of it.

Yes I do. I use Foundation Zurb framework almost in every project but it depends on project requirements. Using Foundation is fun because you select only the components you want to work with.

I personally prefer to use Bootstrap. It help you to develop the site much faster and responsive. I believe Every Front End dev will have knowledge on HTML and CSS so they can develop a site with out any framework. But the reason behind using framework is it reduce the development time and avoid redundant work.

Not always, as Robert ven der Elst mentioned earlier, this might be overkill for a little app to use big CSS frameworks like bootstrap or foundation.

Instead i just use a simpler one, called Skeleton : getskeleton.com Just a css file that give some basic styling for buttons, forms, typo, tables and lists, but also a grid. I think this is a good starter for simple project, if you do not have time to create yours :)

It depends on the project.

But always using gridlex gridlex.devlint.fr and sanitize.css 10up.github.io/sanitize.css

In bigger projects we add additionally PostCSS and some cute plugins like NanoCSS and then write CSS stuff by our self. Testing CSS is done with garris.github.io/BackstopJS

Never used a framework so far really. They provide a good structure, but sometimes I feel that if you don't use 100% of the functions/options that it's a bit of an overkill.

I've usually just use a normalize/reset CSS and made my own little framework when needed and that works fine so far.

I can imagine that if you need to whip up a site really fast, that then it's very useful to have a framework to hit the ground running, but for me personally, I stick to my own stuff. ;)