Bootstrap vs Gumby: What are the differences?
Developers describe Bootstrap as "Simple and flexible HTML, CSS, and JS for popular UI components and interactions". Bootstrap is the most popular HTML, CSS, and JS framework for developing responsive, mobile first projects on the web. On the other hand, Gumby is detailed as "A Flexible, Responsive CSS Framework - Powered by Sass". Create rapid and logical page layout and app prototypes with a flexible and responsive grid system and UI kit.
Bootstrap and Gumby can be categorized as "Front-End Frameworks" tools.
Some of the features offered by Bootstrap are:
- Preprocessors: Bootstrap ships with vanilla CSS, but its source code utilizes the two most popular CSS preprocessors, Less and Sass. Quickly get started with precompiled CSS or build on the source.
- One framework, every device: Bootstrap easily and efficiently scales your websites and applications with a single code base, from phones to tablets to desktops with CSS media queries.
- Full of features: With Bootstrap, you get extensive and beautiful documentation for common HTML elements, dozens of custom HTML and CSS components, and awesome jQuery plugins.
On the other hand, Gumby provides the following key features:
- Syntactically Awesome - Gumby 2 is built with the power of Sass. Sass is a powerful CSS preprocessor which allows us to develop Gumby itself with much more speed — and gives you new tools to quickly customize and build on top of the Gumby Framework.
- Brilliantly Flexible - Gumby 2 is an amazing responsive CSS Framework. Websites built today must be mobile friendly in order to survive. Why have two different sites for mobile and desktop when you can have your main site be one size fits all? Gumby Framework is also incredibly customizable
- it’s as easy as download, tweak, deploy!
Bootstrap and Gumby are both open source tools. Bootstrap with 134K GitHub stars and 66K forks on GitHub appears to be more popular than Gumby with 2.95K GitHub stars and 479 GitHub forks.
What is Bootstrap?
What is Gumby?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using Gumby?
Sign up to add, upvote and see more consMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Gumby?
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
ReactQL is written in TypeScript to provide full types/Intellisense, and pick up hard-to-diagnose goofs that might later show up at runtime. React makes heavy use of Webpack 4 to handle transforming your code to an optimised client-side bundle, and in throws back just enough code needed for the initial render, while seamlessly handling
import statements asynchronously as needed, making the payload your user downloads ultimately much smaller than trying to do it by hand.
React Helmet was chosen to handle
<head> content, because it works universally, making it easy to throw back the correct
<title> and other tags on the initial render, as well as inject new tags for subsequent client-side views.
<style> tags when using #StyledComponents.
React Router handles routing, because it works both on the server and in the client. ReactQL customises it further by capturing non-200 responses on the server, redirecting or throwing back custom 404 pages as needed.
Koa is the web server that handles all incoming HTTP requests, because it's fast (TTFB < 5ms, even after fully rendering React), and its natively #async, making it easy to async/await inside routes and middleware.
We have been using it for the past 3 years and have no complaints
Good service with a good price, worth the money.
Leanstack was on Bootstrap 2. Chose this because it is wildly popular, so it’s active, has been used a lot in production, and has a ton of features. Anything you need to do from a UI perspective, there’s likely a plugin for it already part of the library. Haven’t tried the others, but we're happy with BS.
For StackShare, we upgraded to Bootstrap 3. I don’t like that they changed the name of columns, essentially breaking the grid layout for Bootstrap 2 and below, so that was a real pain to update. I hope they don’t do that again. Once we have more bandwidth, we’re totally going to decouple our markup from Bootstrap.
We started with a bootstrap based template and then completely rewrote it due to poor design of the template. Using boostrap properly was a great experience - once you learn it and use it properly, it's simple to use and very good at being responsive and adapting to the various screen view.
I simply bought a "job board" template for the website, which is written using Bootstrap 2. I'm hoping to upgrade the site to Boostrap 3 when I'll have a time.
Я просто купил шаблон для доски вакансий, написанный на Boostrap 2. Когда будет время перепишу все на Bootstrap 3.