Animate.css vs Bulma

Overview

Bulma

Stacks780

Followers855

Votes38

GitHub Stars50.0K

Forks3.9K

Animate.css

Stacks11.4K

Followers3.1K

Votes0

Animate.css vs Bulma: What are the differences?

1. **Ease of Use**: Animate.css is a ready-to-use library that allows users to easily add animations to their website by simply linking the CSS file. In contrast, Bulma is a full CSS framework that offers a comprehensive set of styling components for building responsive websites. 2. **Animation Variety**: Animate.css provides a wide range of animation effects such as fadeIn, bounce, slideIn, etc., making it perfect for adding simple yet impactful animations to elements on a website. On the other hand, Bulma focuses more on layout and design elements rather than animations, offering a cleaner and more modern aesthetic. 3. **Community Support**: Animate.css has a large community of developers who contribute to the library and help troubleshoot any issues that users may encounter. Bulma also has a strong community, but its focus is more on providing resources and tutorials for using the framework effectively rather than constantly updating animation features. 4. **Customization Options**: With Animate.css, users have limited customization options for each animation effect, while Bulma offers more flexibility in terms of customizing the look and feel of components using variables and modifiers. 5. **JavaScript Integration**: Animate.css relies solely on CSS for animations, while Bulma incorporates JavaScript components for interactive elements like dropdowns, modals, and tabs. This makes Bulma a more versatile option for websites that require dynamic functionality in addition to visual appeal. 6. **Mobile Responsiveness**: Bulma is designed with a mobile-first approach, ensuring that websites built with the framework are responsive and optimized for various devices. Animate.css, on the other hand, does not focus on responsive design and may require additional tweaks to work seamlessly on mobile platforms.

In Summary, Animate.css is best suited for quickly adding a variety of predefined animations to elements on a website, while Bulma is a comprehensive CSS framework that prioritizes design consistency, customization, and mobile responsiveness.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on Bulma, Animate.css

Daniel

Frontend Developer at atSistemas

Jun 10, 2020

Needs adviceon

New Relic

Next.js

React

I'm building, from scratch, a webapp. It's going to be a dashboard to check on our apps in New Relic and update the Apdex from the webapp. I have just chosen Next.js as our framework because we use React already, and after going through the tutorial, I just loved the latest changes they have implemented.

But we have to decide on a CSS framework for the UI. I'm partial to Bulma because I love that it's all about CSS (and you can use SCSS from the start), that it's rather lightweight and that it doesn't come with JavaScript clutter. One of the things I hate about Bootstrap is that you depend on jQuery to use the JavaScript part. My boss loves UIkIt, but when I've used it in the past, I didn't like it.

What do you think we should use? Maybe you have another suggestion?

1.07M views1.07M

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Bulma	Animate.css
Bulma is a CSS framework based on Flexbox and built with Sass	It is a bunch of cool, fun, and cross-browser animations for you to use in your projects. Great for emphasis, home pages, sliders, and general just-add-water-awesomeness.
-	Cross-browser animations; Usage with Javascript; Setting Delay and Speed
Statistics
GitHub Stars 50.0K	GitHub Stars -
GitHub Forks 3.9K	GitHub Forks -
Stacks 780	Stacks 11.4K
Followers 855	Followers 3.1K
Votes 38	Votes 0
Pros & Cons
Pros 12 Easy setup 6 Easy-to-customize the sass build 6 Community-created themes 5 Great docs 5 Responsive Cons 2 Not yet supporting Vue 3	No community feedback yet
Integrations
No integrations available	CSS 3 HTML5

What are some alternatives to Bulma, Animate.css ?

Bootstrap

Bootstrap is the most popular HTML, CSS, and JS framework for developing responsive, mobile first projects on the web.

Sass

Sass is an extension of CSS3, adding nested rules, variables, mixins, selector inheritance, and more. It's translated to well-formatted, standard CSS using the command line tool or a web-framework plugin.

Less

Less is a CSS pre-processor, meaning that it extends the CSS language, adding features that allow variables, mixins, functions and many other techniques that allow you to make CSS that is more maintainable, themable and extendable.

Foundation

Foundation is the most advanced responsive front-end framework in the world. You can quickly prototype and build sites or apps that work on any kind of device with Foundation, which includes layout constructs (like a fully responsive grid), elements and best practices.

Semantic UI

Semantic empowers designers and developers by creating a shared vocabulary for UI.

Materialize

A CSS Framework based on material design.

Material Design for Angular

Material Design is a specification for a unified system of visual, motion, and interaction design that adapts across different devices. Our goal is to deliver a lean, lightweight set of AngularJS-native UI elements that implement the material design system for use in Angular SPAs.

Material-UI

Material UI is a library of React UI components that implements Google's Material Design.

Blazor

Blazor is a .NET web framework that runs in any browser. You author Blazor apps using C#/Razor and HTML.

Quasar Framework

Build responsive Single Page Apps, SSR Apps, PWAs, Hybrid Mobile Apps and Electron Apps, all using the same codebase!, powered with Vue.

Related Comparisons

Animate.css vs Bulma: What are the differences?

Animate.css vs Bulma

Overview