StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Application & Data
  3. Frameworks
  4. Front End Frameworks
  5. Foundation vs Quasar Framework

Foundation vs Quasar Framework

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Foundation
Foundation
Stacks1.2K
Followers1.2K
Votes740
Quasar Framework
Quasar Framework
Stacks451
Followers771
Votes404
GitHub Stars26.9K
Forks3.7K

Foundation vs Quasar Framework: What are the differences?

# Key Differences between Foundation and Quasar Framework

Foundation and Quasar Framework are both powerful front-end frameworks used for building responsive websites and applications. Despite their common goal, they have distinct differences that can impact the development process and overall outcome of a project. 

1. **Structure and Components**: Foundation provides a solid grid system and a wide range of components right out of the box, making it ideal for custom designs and workflows. On the other hand, Quasar Framework offers a rich set of ready-to-use components with a Material Design look and feel, streamlining the development process for projects adhering to this design language.

2. **Theming and Customization**: While Foundation allows for deep customization, it may require more expertise and time to implement bespoke designs. Quasar Framework, with its theming capabilities and pre-designed components, offers a quicker path to building visually appealing apps while providing options for customization when needed.

3. **Build Configurations**: Foundation offers flexibility in terms of build configurations, allowing developers to tailor the build process according to project requirements. Quasar Framework, with its CLI and pre-configured setup, simplifies the initial setup process while offering options for further optimizations and customizations as the project evolves.

4. **Supported Platforms**: Foundation primarily focuses on web applications and websites, providing robust support for responsive web design. In contrast, Quasar Framework extends its reach to include development for mobile applications, Electron apps, and more, offering a versatile solution for multi-platform development needs.

5. **Performance and Size**: Foundation tends to be more lightweight and efficient in terms of file size and performance, making it a suitable choice for projects where speed and smaller footprint are crucial factors. Quasar Framework, while feature-rich, may introduce additional overhead due to its comprehensive set of components and functionalities.

6. **Community and Ecosystem**: Foundation has a longstanding community with extensive resources and documentation to support developers through their projects. Quasar Framework, being a newer player in the field, is rapidly growing its community and ecosystem, offering a fresh perspective and modern solutions to front-end development challenges.

In Summary, the choice between Foundation and Quasar Framework largely depends on the specific requirements and priorities of the project, with Foundation excelling in customization and flexibility, while Quasar Framework stands out for its streamlined development process and support for diverse platforms.

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)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

Foundation
Foundation
Quasar Framework
Quasar Framework

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.

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

Semantic: Everything is semantic. You can have the cleanest markup without sacrificing the utility and speed of Foundation.;Mobile First: You can build for small devices first. Then, as devices get larger and larger, layer in more complexity for a complete responsive design.;Customizable: You can customize your build to include or remove certain elements, as well as define the size of columns, colors, font size and more.;Professional: Millions of designers and developers depend on Foundation. Now we have business support, training and consulting to help grow your product or service.
SPAs (Single Page App); SSR (Server-side Rendered App); PWAs (Progressive Web App); Mobile apps (Android, iOS, …); Electron; Vue.js; Full RTL support; Persian calendar; Material design 2; Complete documentation; Unit test ready
Statistics
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Stars
26.9K
GitHub Forks
-
GitHub Forks
3.7K
Stacks
1.2K
Stacks
451
Followers
1.2K
Followers
771
Votes
740
Votes
404
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 160
    Responsive grid
  • 93
    Mobile first
  • 80
    Open source
  • 75
    Semantic
  • 72
    Customizable
Cons
  • 5
    Requires jQuery
  • 4
    Awful site
Pros
  • 59
    Excellent documentation
  • 44
    Deploy one codebase to web, desktop, mobile, and more
  • 40
    Lots of UI components
  • 39
    Extensive collection of components
  • 33
    Being able to bundle for almost all platform is awesome
Cons
  • 4
    Stackoverflow 1.5k Questions
Integrations
No integrations available
Linux
Linux
Electron
Electron
macOS
macOS
Windows
Windows
Vue.js
Vue.js
Material Design
Material Design

What are some alternatives to Foundation, Quasar Framework?

Bootstrap

Bootstrap

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

Semantic UI

Semantic UI

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

Materialize

Materialize

A CSS Framework based on material design.

Material Design for Angular

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

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

Blazor

Blazor

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

Nuxt.js

Nuxt.js

Nuxt.js presets all the configuration needed to make your development of a Vue.js application enjoyable. You can use Nuxt.js for SSR, SPA, Static Generated, PWA and more.

UIkIt

UIkIt

UIkit gives you a comprehensive collection of HTML, CSS, and JS components which is simple to use, easy to customize and extendable.

Tailwind CSS

Tailwind CSS

Tailwind is different from frameworks like Bootstrap, Foundation, or Bulma in that it's not a UI kit. It doesn't have a default theme, and there are no build-in UI components. It comes with a menu of predesigned widgets to build your site with, but doesn't impose design decisions that are difficult to undo.

Vuetify

Vuetify

Vuetify is a component framework for Vue.js 2. It aims to provide clean, semantic and reusable components that make building your application a breeze. Vuetify utilizes Google's Material Design design pattern, taking cues from other popular frameworks such as Materialize.css, Material Design Lite, Semantic UI and Bootstrap 4.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase