I never gave a flying *** about HTML/CSS "frameworks" in the first place other than to belittle the mental midgetry required to come up with them. BY THEIR VERY NATURE HTML/CSS frameworks rely on the presentational use of classes, defeating the entire point of why HTML and CSS are separate, to the point you might as well go back to writing HTML 3.2 and forgetting CSS even exists!!! See such mind-numbingly idiotic BS as:
<nav class="navbar navbar-toggleable-md navbar-inverse fixed-top bg-inverse">
<button class="navbar-toggler navbar-toggler-right" type="button" data-toggle="collapse" data-target="#navbarsExampleDefault" aria-controls="navbarsExampleDefault" aria-expanded="false" aria-label="Toggle navigation">
<span class="navbar-toggler-icon"></span>
</button>
<a class="navbar-brand" href="#">Site Title</a>
<div class="collapse navbar-collapse" id="navbarsExampleDefault">
<ul class="navbar-nav mr-auto">
<li class="nav-item active">
<a class="nav-link" href="#">Home <span class="sr-only">(current)</span></a>
doing the job of
<div id="top">
<h1><a href="/">Site Title</a></h1>
<input type="checkbox" id="mainMenuShowHide">
<label for="mainMenuShowHide"></label>
<ul id="mainMenu">
<li class="current">
<a href="#">Home</a>
... and then with the endless pointless classes for nothing and scripttardery doing CSS' bloody job, they have the unmitigated gall to call writing three times the markup "Easier"?!? BULL-FREAKING-S***!!!
That's the biggest problem with these dumbass frameworks too, people seem to believe they are 'easier' or 'simpler' or 'make you more productive' when NONE of that is true. They make MORE work, result in MORE convoluted codebases, piss on accessibility from orbit, and make you start out with three times the code in their library alone than you should have for HTML+CSS+SCRIPTS combined on a properly done website!
How in the blazes anyone could think that writing two to ten times the markup and almost as much CSS as you'd have WITHOUT the framework is easier I'll never fathom. HTML/CSS frameworks are inherently more work, more convoluted, more code, and more to learn.
The only way I can figure that anyone could call it 'easier' is if they don't know enough about HTML or CSS to even offer a valid opinion on the subject, and have fallen into the echo-chamber bandwagon propaganda trap... where "frameworks are easier" has become akin to Goebbels "big lie" -- it's been repeated often enough and loudly enough that people who just don't know any better think it's the truth.
I've never seen ANYTHING built with HTML/CSS frameworks that wasn't more effort, more code without counting the framework size against the total, or didn't piss on accessibility and usability from so on high you'd think the almighty had just gotten back from a kegger!
... and I've been saying that since before flexbox was even real world deployable; and for my current clients neither it nor the horribly misnamed CSS grid layout module are. Since "CSS grids" has dick to do with the asshat presentational crap "grids" people have been slopping around as a layout concept as you can have fluid widths using the layout module, whilst true grids are inherently fixed! Remember, fixed width layout == epic /FAIL/ at web design!!!