Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Materialize vs Tailwind CSS: What are the differences?
Introduction
Materialize and Tailwind CSS are two popular front-end CSS frameworks used for building responsive and visually appealing websites. While both frameworks offer numerous features and benefits, they have some key differences that set them apart.
Design Philosophy: Materialize follows the Material Design principles, which focus on providing a clean and intuitive user interface with a visually appealing design. On the other hand, Tailwind CSS adopts a utility-first approach, allowing developers to rapidly build custom designs by using pre-defined utility classes. This flexibility in Tailwind CSS allows for more creativity and customization in the design process.
Class Name Usage: Materialize uses pre-defined class names that are specific to its components and styles. These class names are used directly in the HTML markup to style the elements. On the contrary, Tailwind CSS provides a large set of utility classes that can be used to apply styles directly in the HTML markup. This approach eliminates the need for writing custom CSS rules and enables easy and quick styling modifications.
File Size: Materialize has a higher file size as compared to Tailwind CSS due to the inclusion of pre-defined styles and components. The larger file size of Materialize may affect the website's loading time, especially on slower internet connections. Tailwind CSS, on the other hand, is built with a smaller file size and allows developers to only include the required utility classes, resulting in a lighter and more performant website.
Customization: Materialize offers a limited level of customization and requires developers to follow its predefined styles and components. However, Tailwind CSS provides extensive customization options through its configuration file, allowing developers to customize color schemes, breakpoints, spacing, and more. This level of customization gives developers more control over the design and layout of their websites.
Learning Curve: Materialize provides a set of ready-to-use components and styles, making it easier for beginners to get started quickly. It follows a more traditional CSS framework approach, familiar to many developers. Tailwind CSS, on the other hand, has a steeper learning curve as it requires understanding utility classes and their combinations. However, once mastered, Tailwind CSS offers greater flexibility and efficiency in building websites.
Compatibility: Materialize is compatible with a wide range of browsers, including older versions. It ensures consistent rendering and functionality across different browsers. Tailwind CSS is also compatible with modern browsers but may require additional polyfills or JavaScript plugins for older browsers. However, Tailwind CSS's utility-first approach simplifies the process of creating responsive designs and ensures consistent behavior across various screen sizes.
In summary, Materialize follows the Material Design principles, provides ready-to-use components, and has a larger file size, while Tailwind CSS follows a utility-first approach, offers extensive customization options, and has a smaller file size. The choice between the two frameworks ultimately depends on the project requirements, design preferences, and development workflow.
I am a bit confused when to choose Bootstrap vs Material Design or Tailwind CSS, and why? I mean, in which kind of projects we can work with bootstrap/Material/Tailwind CSS? If the design is made up on the grid, we prefer bootstrap, and if flat design, then material design. Similarly, when do we choose tailwind CSS?
Any suggestion would be appreciated?
I don't know about material design.
You would go with Bootstrap if you want to prototype / build something without bothering about the design at all and you are OK if everything looks kinda template-y, using bootstrap out of the box components.
Go with Tailwind if you need a sleek design, a user interface where building with components will be important (because tailwind strongly favors component-based UI), and you know you will need to extend the built-in classes with your own (because tailwind is very easy to extend)
I would personally recommend tailwind over bootstrap any day of the week.
Hi Ashish,
If you need minimal work to be done from your end and like most of the components / design available out of the box - go with Bootstrap. This is the oldest and has the widest adoption and a whole range of components built out by others.
If you like Material design, this is a good choice too. Please note that Bootstrap also has a Material theme, though it is not as native.
Both of these above frameworks are bulky and has more than what you may need.
If you like to build micro-components in a elegant way, TailwindCSS is the way to go.
Tailwind is great you don't have to mess with naming things and it is so much more flexible than the cookie cutter bootstrap, but I don't know about material UI. I recommend tailwind it's super simple to learn and has great code snippets.
Put simply, you should use Tailwind regardless. It is a great addition to whatever you use because it removes the hassle of writing CSS.
I am planning to redesign my entire application, which is currently in Bootstrap. I heard about Tailwind CSS, and I think its really cool to work with. Is it okay if I use Bootstrap and Tailwind together? I can't remove Bootstrap altogether, as my application is using the js dependencies of Bootstrap, which I don't want to disturb.
Factually talking about systems, we gotta make two bold headlines about each one: Bootstrap has been around for a while, has a vast community and much probably will not be gone in a while. Tailwind in the other hand, is the trendy framework starting from the past year. Referring to UI, I really prefer Tailwind, however I can't ignore the fact that a lot of libraries that emerged felt short in the end after a few years (a point where Bootstrap kept his status).
You are able to use both them together but I advise you — it will be a mess. And you gotta hope that you won't have any kind of conflicts between class naming and other general styling.
My recommendation would be to use one and only one. Perhaps rebuild the UI with a specific framework in mind, otherwise you will start to workaround things of both frameworks to contradict each other - and your team (if you work with one) will hate you.
You might have heard about bootstrap 5. Bootstrap is now totally jQuery free. i have tried foundation and bulma too. but eventually fall again for bootstrap, as it is most convenient and stable. i use bootstrap with less or sass.
I use both of these regularly. If you're going to have to use Bootstrap due to your js dependencies, stick with Bootstrap. I actually prefer Tailwind, but trying to use both of them and make them "play nice" feels like making things more complex with no real benefit.
EDIT: Sorry for the late response, I just noticed how old this is. StackShare sent me this in an email for some reason so I assumed it was relatively fresh.
We are re-modifying the existing portal to the new one. Looking out for a CSS framework where over-rides are possible, the performance of page loading, extendable, etc Please suggest between tailwind, UIkit and bootstrap frameworks explaining in detail on different factors. I request your help on the same.
Hey Sai, My thoughts on UIkit - It's beautiful, fast, and it has good animation too. Why would I choose it ? Nothing other than giving the internet a new look .
My thoughts on Bootstrap - it's beautiful, if used well. It's very fast and has clean class naming convention unlike Uikit. Why I would choose it ? It's been tested and trusted, I can find a whole lot of resources and a community around it. Also with the type of project you working on I bet Bootstrap would do the job .
Now, considering Tailwind, it's seen as a classic, simple-to-set-up tool with clean utilities. I wouldn't think of tailwind the way I would to Bootstrap or UIkit. What do I mean ? Tailwind is more like a tool set to create your own design flow. Tailwind allows you to build unique design elements, offering you a level of customization that may be unmatched by the other frameworks.
My final thoughts.
If you have the time , setup and use tailwind it will give you a great chance when it comes to customization and performance.
I'm a big proponent of Tailwind and I personally use it whenever I get the chance, mostly because it's not really a UI-kit, but it sounds like in this case a UI-kit like Bootstrap with pre-defined components is more what you are looking for. Bootstrap is (relatively) extendable and overridable and makes it really simple to make a decent looking UI using a handful of pre-defined classes, whereas with Tailwind you configure the classes and create your own components. My main reason for replacing Bootstrap in my workflow is that it feels like the component creation has become so abstracted from the developer that any meaningful customization becomes a chore, resulting in many websites having the generic "Bootstrap-look". Nonetheless, it is effective for creating a pleasant and responsive UI. Though, I don't have any experience with UIkit.
As our team will be building a web application, HTML5
and CSS3
are one of the standardized combinations to implement the structure and the styling of a webpage. Material-UI
comes with all sorts of predesigned web components such as buttons and dropdowns that will save us tons of development time. Since it is a component library designed for React, it suits our needs. However, we do acknowledge that predesigned components may sometimes cause pains especially when it comes to custom styling. To make our life even easier, we also adopted Tailwind CSS
. It is a CSS framework providing low-level utility classes that will act as building blocks when we create custom designs.
I do prefer to write things from scratch however when it came to wanting to jump-start the frontend, I found that it was taking me a lot longer hence why needing to use something very fast.
Bootstrap was the boom when it came out, I didn't like it, to be honest, set in its way and a pain to over-ride and in addition, you can tell from a distance if you're using boostrap and as everything looks the same.
I came across Tailwind CSS as I wanted more dynamic features, you could say, I've been now doing it for a few days and I love it a lot. I've been practising with the full stack part installed but I an't we wait until I do a new project, and I'll e able to select exactly what I want. Much faster.
Pros of Materialize
- Google material design102
- Easy to use74
- Responsive74
- Modern looks54
- Open source48
- Good documentation42
- Code examples37
- Extremely light - 29kb29
- Flexible28
- Great Support15
- It looks beautiful10
- Very nice looking components to quickly build out8
- Smooth animation7
- Great Grid System6
- Great4
- Ruby gem to integrate in 2 seconds flat4
- Angular2 Support3
- MIT Lisence2
- Friendly api, easy setup, good documentation2
- Easy setup2
- React1
- Grid system1
- Because of the easy to use and very editable library1
- Responsivness1
- Jibberish1
- Friendly Api1
- Better class name0
- Rtl support0
Pros of Tailwind CSS
- Highly customizable44
- Quick setup33
- Utility first styles, its amazing30
- Versatile24
- Great docs23
- Customizable16
- Fast16
- Consistent15
- Very light11
- Semantic11
- Open source11
- Responsive9
- Easy Tree shaking with Tailwind CLI1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Materialize
- Mobile errors7
- Poor Grid System6
- Unmaintained2
Cons of Tailwind CSS
- Priced14
- Cluttered html structure5