Foundation vs Material Design for Bootstrap: What are the differences?
Foundation and Material Design for Bootstrap can be categorized as "Front-End Frameworks" tools.
Some of the features offered by Foundation are:
- 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.
On the other hand, Material Design for Bootstrap provides the following key features:
- Input fields (text, numeric, email, etc)
- Buttons (ripple effect working)
"Responsive grid" is the primary reason why developers consider Foundation over the competitors, whereas "Bootstrap" was stated as the key factor in picking Material Design for Bootstrap.
Foundation and Material Design for Bootstrap are both open source tools. It seems that Foundation with 28.2K GitHub stars and 5.77K forks on GitHub has more adoption than Material Design for Bootstrap with 19.9K GitHub stars and 3.31K GitHub forks.
HotelTonight, StatSheet, and Customer.io are some of the popular companies that use Foundation, whereas Material Design for Bootstrap is used by MXD3D, Itbid, and TypeLead. Foundation has a broader approval, being mentioned in 653 company stacks & 77 developers stacks; compared to Material Design for Bootstrap, which is listed in 5 company stacks and 6 developer stacks.
What is Foundation?
What is Material Design for Bootstrap?
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 Material Design for Bootstrap?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Material Design for Bootstrap?
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.
I use it for a lot of professional work where I might need more than just a responsive grid. Has a great set of mixins and components and also some nice JS-modules. I love that its so style-agnostic. Really easy to add custom styling.
Foundation has been my choice for years over Bootstrap and other similar CSS frameworks due to the naming conventions, well-designed built-in components, and it plays well with React when I'm not using ElementalUI instead.