
Bootstrap 3 preview  - winkerVSbecks
http://rc.getbootstrap.com/css/
======
drewmclellan
The issue Bootstrap still has is that the parts that make use of JavaScript
completely rely on JavaScript. If you're on a flakey data connection, for
example, and JavaScript doesn't load parts of the page simply break.

The tab component is a good example of this - turn off JavaScript in your
browser and you'll see that it still looks like tabs (thanks to CSS) but you
just can't access anything part from the first tab.

Technically, this isn't a hard problem to solve. Have JavaScript add the HTML
class that triggers the CSS rules to make the content look like tabs. If
JavaScript fails, no part of the page ever gets hidden.

It would be great to see Bootstrap embrace progressive enhancement properly.
With more devices of different capabilities accessing the web over networks of
varying quality all the time, it becomes more important than ever to build
robustly and not just for the best-case scenario.

~~~
Diamons
I disagree. As a web designer/developer your job is to make sure your site
looks proper. If someone chooses to disable javascript, they know that they
are missing out. It's their personal choice to embrace an inferior web
experience, and I don't think it's fair to have to compensate for them as
well.

~~~
lukifer
...except that JS can also fail due to network lag or simple programming
errors (like a trailing JSON comma in IE). Ideally, sites should remain as
functional as possible if JS or CSS fail to load. (Admittedly, a great many
large websites fail this test.)

~~~
criley
Requiring a refresh is not outlandish. If they failed to load the content due
to network error, they will already be used to that kind of flaky connection
and the refreshes it requires.

Specifically building your app to attempt to handle the "bad data connection"
use case that users already are familiar with in the context of the internet
seems like bad programming.

Why provide a usable but substandard experience when those users would get a
superior experience after a simple refresh?

As for the "turned it off crowd": in terms of web apps, who cares? If you've
disabled Javascript, you're not looking to use web apps -- _period_.
Javascript is _required_ to use web apps for anything other than fancy form
posting...

Of course, every site's audience is different, and you should prioritize your
development for your audience.

~~~
sc0rb
It's annoying when you're using a different device in a locked down
environment to have to deal with pages braking because some JS (or other)
won't load on whatever piece of junk browser or device I have to use. I had
this issue a lot when traveling through Asia, I never realise how bad
accessibility was until I had to use crap phones and dodgy computers to access
airline websites.

For the love of god please provide a BASIC fall back!

Slightly adhomien edit, but I think you're ignorant and live in a bubble. Not
everyone uses their computer, or has the same level of access, like you do.

~~~
criley
What you call a bubble, I call my target audience. I don't mind that I
accurately target my audience and prioritize my development towards them.

If information is what you care about and not design, style, or functionality,
than my pages are perfectly readable on a screenreader. It will look and
function like shit but the people who see it that way A) expect to or B) are
not my target audience.

But you're right, it's a bubble. If my audience included people with poor data
connections in Asia, then I would certainly approach the problem differently.

However, when it's just one guy making something, prioritization and cutting
out the nonsense (like bad connections from Asia) are vital ;)

~~~
sc0rb
If any of your target audience may use your service from a less than desirable
connection or device then you should try and make it as accessible as
possible. Falling back to non fancy CSS and JS is vital.

It seems that a lot of services don't really understand their target audience,
why would an airline or online travel insurance firm make JS mandatory?

~~~
criley
>It seems that a lot of services don't really understand their target
audience, why would an airline or online travel insurance firm make JS
mandatory?

Because they wish to offer any form of rich experience that goes beyond form
elements and form submission? Because they want date pickers, column sorting,
marketing tracking, transition effects and a hundred other UX tweaks that are
only possible through javascript?

Why should airline/online travel forgo modern user experiences? To satisfy a
statistically negligible amount of their traffic that cannot see it?

At some point, horses aren't allowed on roads, and users need to buy a car.

~~~
sc0rb
They can still have all of that for most of their users. Users that can't use
these newer features should be offered a simpler more basic experience. Just
because it's a minority of users that want to access your medical claims
portal from abroad (who'd have guessed that this would be a valid use case for
someone who has bought world wide health cover?) this doesn't mean that you
should lock them out.

You are very short sighted. I hope you end up in a position where you need
minor surgery in Vietnam during your gap year and can't enter the claim in the
insurance companies system because they insist that ALL user must be able to
see their fancy drop down menus with rounded corners OR not being able to book
an onward flight from Cambodia therefore being refused entry because you can't
prove that you plan to leave in the next 3 weeks all because the internet
kiosk you're using is blocking the CDN that pushes some crap JS that adds
nothing other than eye candy.

What's wrong with creating an alternate UX without all the overhead?

I hope you suffer the consequences of your own short shortsightedness.

Also, FYI, horses are still allowed on roads.

EDIT (can't reply) I think you'll find that medical insurance sites and
travelling / booking sites are very similar and attract a very similar
userbase. People book flights ticket and medical insurance, people fly then
use the medical insurance when they have too. You seriously do live in a
bubble, i have a feeling you are an American who isn't very well traveled
outside of his own country and only uses medical sites in the context of your
non state health insurance. You probably aren't the kind of person that would
use any of the services I care about.

SECOND EDIT.. I spoke about my two target services from the offset and did not
switch context. Do you not realise how these two sites / services go hand in
hand?

I just got back from skiing. I used an airline site and medical insurance site
for the same trip.

~~~
criley
>You are very short-sighted

Haha. We went from talking about my 1-man development website, to travel
sites, to medical sites.

All because each example is a better fit for your argument. You don't warn me
when you change the context of our conversation, you just do it and then
insult me afterwards for not meeting your newer demands.

Medical =/= travel =/= my site.

Each are _fundamentally_ different industries with dramatically different
requirements. Obviously you have to meet the requirements of your industry and
your users. I have CONSTANTLY SAID that you must prioritize your users.
Medical users ARE NOT travel users ARE NOT blog users.

You're also failing to take into account a team versus one man. One man or
small teams trying to launch have to prioritize their MVP and their main
audience. Massive operations with dozens of developers SHOULD meet everyone
demands, because they have the time and talent to do so.

When you're capable of not context-shifting a conversation to continually cast
your argument as superior, I think this chat can continue.

Otherwise, you're just shifting and insulting me for your own jollies, and
you'll excuse me for not going along with it.

Good day!

EDIT to your EDIT:

I currently work in healthcare IT after transitioning from a major travel IT
company. The requirements are NOTHING alike, really nothing alike at all. The
types of users and the requirements placed on the organizations by regulators
are dramatically different. Medical is a WHOLE different ball game with tons
of people to answer to.

Also, people can be expected to not book a plane flight with a bad connection
on an old phone. "Wait until a better connection" is the standard response
that has worked thus far (or call your secretary/company to handle it).

When it comes to medical data, waiting is less of an option and getting a good
UX is less of a requirement.

~~~
sc0rb
Are you kidding me? Both sites have users that need to access various portals
from foreign countries. That's the basic similarity between the two sites.

Wait for a better connection... oh yeah sure, I'll just go look for another
internet cafe in the middle of nowhere on my travels.... Seriously, you're an
idiot.

So many companies get this right. A few don't. I serioulsy hope you suffer

EDIT: I'm specifically referring to people that travel here. As you live in a
bubble, I doubt this applies to you or the sort of work you do.

~~~
criley
>Are you kidding me? Both sites have users that need to access various portals
from foreign countries. That's the basic similarity between the two sites.

That is the most superficial comparison between two disparate industries that
I've seen in some time.

Yes, both are _websites_ that you _access_.

By this context: I visit mobile gaming websites from foreign countries.
According to your analysis, mobile gaming == travel industry == healthcare.

You do, of course, realize that the regulation requirements behind the systems
that _deliver_ those websites are dramatically different?

Between HIPAA, ARRA, a bevy of other national regulations and 50 separate
state implementations of Medicare/aid with additional privacy and other
regulations on the state level, I hope you can appreciate that medical
software requirements are fundamentally different.

Implementing a medical portal is an order of magnitude more difficult than a
travel portal from the regulation and control side alone.

Put it this way: if you leak user data on a travel site, all you might have to
do is write mea culpa and force a password change.

If you leak user data on a medical site: the fucking hammer comes down, public
disclosure is mandated and _heavy fines will follow_.

These kind of systemic differences absolutely affect the end user UX and the
kinds of priorities that developers have going into it.

Making sure spotty data connections work is less of a priority than making
sure a secure connection is present when dealing with HIPAA protected data.

~~~
sc0rb
All I'm saying is... websites and portals that are accessed from devices and
connections, in emergency-ish situations, should really have fallback modes so
they work when I'm stuck in immigration in a third world country (or
hospital).

long haul airline sites and medical insurance sites fall under this category.
I'm not talking about this from any other perspective than accessibility under
less than desirable conditions.

I don't really see how this has anything to do with American state laws.
Accessing a portal that tells an insurance company that I need treatment
abroad is a simple. Can you please burst your god damn bubble. We're talking
about JS and CSS fallback not the united states of americas various laws in
regards to medical records.

Have you ever left the US?

~~~
criley
Yes, sites whose main audience may view it from those limited connections
should devote resources to ensuring that they can access it from limited
connections.

I clearly stated exactly that in _my first original post in this thread_. I
said, always know your audience and prioritize your development for your
audience. I don't know why you've missed me saying that 4+ times at this
point. I guess it's because you want to "win" a debate, even though I made
your point before you even read my original post.

>I don't really see how this has anything to do with American state laws.

Because accessing data requires you follow the laws governing that data
regardless of where the request comes from.

>Have you ever left the US?

Have you ever programmed before? Do you know what software requirements are,
or legal requirements, or any of it?

Honestly, you sound like a layman. 100% end user with zero experience in
building a portal or medical software or anything else. "Who cares about laws,
I'm talking about css fallback". Well, the people who pass and enforce those
laws care, even if you don't. And they will make sure you care sooner or
later, if you plan on staying in business.

That's the point. You _have_ to care about laws because they're fucking laws!
You don't get to just distribute protected medical data over insecure
connections because it's convenient for end users! _That's illegal_.

And protected medical data IS DIFFERENT from non-protected personal travel
data!

I know that understanding that difference is difficult for an end-user, but
please respect that the concepts are completely different and pretending that
"it's the same" only hurts your ability to understand the additional
complexity that security laws like HIPAA introduce.

Please do not talk to me any more. I have no interest in replies and have
provided this one because you keep stalking me in other posts, so I wish to
provide closure.

If you want the last word, _please take it here and no where else_.

Please stop following me and posting on unrelated threads, it's extremely
immature.

~~~
sc0rb
You're an idiot, I'm talking about the accessibility of a data entry portal.
There's no reason to not make it work in sub optimal conditions if ANY (not
just your main) of your user base are likely to be in those conditions.

This has very little to do with data protection laws. I'm not talking about
making your data secure, using ssl, redundancy in your database etc. These are
all requirements but this is not what I'm talking about.

Simple accessibility in sub-optimal conditions. Stop trying make your small
minded opinions the focus of this. Do you even own a passport?

~~~
jdgiese
haha, criley won already

~~~
sc0rb
wtf?

I'm right, he's clearly a try hard with no idea what he's talking about.

------
hannibalhorn
If anyone is looking for a basic summary of "What's new", the best I found was
their blog post about plans for v3:

<http://blog.getbootstrap.com/2012/12/10/bootstrap-3-plans/>

~~~
welder
Here's the most comprehensive list of changes I've found. The pull request for
Bootstrap 3 on github:

<https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6342>

~~~
hannibalhorn
That's a much more informative list, thanks!

------
benoitg
For everyone complaining about the flatness, it looks like it's only
temporary.

[https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6342#issuecomment-...](https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6342#issuecomment-12332378)

~~~
cwilson
Happy to see even though the removal temporary, they are looking into a way to
easily remove styles for those who enjoy the flatness.

~~~
benoitg
This goes even further than the flat/gradients debate and will also be useful
for people who'd like to deeply customize bootstrap.

Customizing Bootstrap has always been a pain (and I'm not the only one to
think this, in the words of @mdo : _those who want to use Bootstrap as a
bootstrap kind of get the short end of the stick_ ), I'm very happy to see
that they're looking to make this easier.

------
gavinballard
It's interesting that so many of the comments here (and often, those made
about Bootstrap in general) focus on the aesthetic of a few form elements and
not the utilities that come with the framework. Understandable, I guess, as
they're the most obvious when you load up the page!

I've been playing with the 3.0.0-wip branch for a little while, and I think
that there are a couple of really cool features that should be noted above the
cosmetic - the single, fluid grid; font icons by default; and a mobile-first
design.

~~~
baby
Well there is no Scaffolding section so it's hard to know what changed beside
the aesthetic.

~~~
rkuykendall-com
This is the new scaffolding section: <http://rc.getbootstrap.com/css/#grid-
system>

I've only been using bootstrap for a week, but I instantly noticed that the
grid elements were separated not with a left margin, but with both left and
right padding. This is going to be fantastic, and shows their responsive first
thinking.

~~~
baby
Weird that the Grid section is buried in the CSS section where it's the most
important. See, I like that Foundation starts by explaining directly how the
grid system works. That columns need to be in rows, etc... Overall Bootstrap's
documentation is better, but it lacks this Grid System first approach.

Still no border-sizing:border-box. Which makes me still root for Foundation.

Buuut, there is now a better nesting (Foundation-like) where there is no need
to write row-fluid. Which is good.

~~~
gavinballard
I believe Bootstrap 3 does in fact use border-box - hence the padded grids and
a major driver behind the drop in support for IE7.

~~~
baby
No signs of border-box in the code.

~~~
gavinballard
[https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/blob/3.0.0-wip/less/gri...](https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/blob/3.0.0-wip/less/grid.less#L22-L24)

You might be looking at the 2.3.1 (master) branch, which didn't use border-box
:).

------
alexvr
Not sure if I like this at all. I think they need to call it

Bootstrap 3: flat and fat!

It just seems like a huge step back to me. It's not even an elegant "flat"
design; it's like they scrapped everything and decided to make all classes
(even buttons for God's sake) DIVs of different colors. The new navbar, for
example, is literally a gray DIV with rounded edges. I use Bootstrap on my web
app because I care about design, but I don't care so much about learning fancy
CSS; Bootstrap takes care of making things look subtly 3D, shaded, animated,
etc., and that's what I'm looking for. I can make flat DIVs myself, thank you
very much.

~~~
Kudos
The more people stop using Bootstrap as a complete design the happier I will
be.

~~~
alexvr
Not everyone is a HTML/CSS hacker. It's a really valuable front-end framework.
My app wouldn't look nearly as professional without it.

~~~
dictum
It's OK for the first iterations, but if you really care about your product,
you should hire a HTML/CSS hacker.

~~~
alexvr
Yeah, but I'm a broke high school senior (1-man team), so I'm sort of forced
to take advantage of free stuff like Bootstrap and the free year of Amazon
EC2.

Bootstrap is definitely useful if you're just tinkering - it makes a minimum
viable product look sort of legit ;)

But I would certainly invest in specialized developers to make a lighter-
weight, in-house UI if I were really serious about a website.

------
waleedka
For comparison, also check Foundation 4.0, launched about 10 days ago.
Foundation seems to be slightly ahead (as in, already launched) in moving to
newer technologies (mobile-first, border-sizing:border-box, ..etc).

[http://www.zurb.com/article/1173/foundation-4-is-here-the-
sm...](http://www.zurb.com/article/1173/foundation-4-is-here-the-smartest-
foundat)

~~~
Goopplesoft
>Foundation seems to be slightly ahead in moving to newer technologies
(mobile-first, border-sizing:border-box, ..etc).

Check out "Layout and grid system" section here:
<https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6342>, it specifically mentions
border-sizing: border-box is being used and in the top in bold it says
"Bootstrap 3 will be mobile-first"

~~~
waleedka
Bootstrap 3 is not launched yet and Foundation 4 is. That's what I meant by
"slightly ahead".

------
gavingmiller
A big heads up for anyone thinking of switching. Bootstrap 3 "Drops IE7/FF3x
support entirely."

ref: <http://blog.getbootstrap.com/2012/12/10/bootstrap-3-plans/>

~~~
lowboy
A big heads up to those people who still support ie7, that is. Google and
Facebook dropped support a while ago, and ie7's usage share is around 0.6-2.0%
globally.

<http://clicky.com/marketshare/global/web-browsers/versions/>

[http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version_partially_combine...](http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version_partially_combined-
na-monthly-201202-201302)

~~~
lukifer
IE7 doesn't cause nearly the same scale of problems that IE6 did; I don't
think 1% is small enough to justify ignoring it entirely. (I suppose it
depends on whether it degrades gracefully or becomes unusable.)

~~~
bcks
Indeed, I'm starting a responsive site design project that will have a large
target audience in China... where some 20% of users are still on IE6. Looks
like I'll be testing both Bootstrap and Foundation.

~~~
adlpz
Heh, good luck doing responsive on IE6 without going crazy!

------
prisonguard
with some sass knowledge you are better of starting off with a couple of
mixins and building from bottom up as compared to loading a fat css file you
probably won't use 80pc of its rules.

Normalize css[1] Bourbon[2] for utilities Neat[3] for the grid, Typeplate[4]
for a nice type base.

If you still need bootstrap style elements, you can get individual mixins and
styles from one the bootstrap-sass projects[5]

[1] <https://github.com/necolas/normalize.css/>

[2] <http://bourbon.io>

[3] <http://neat.bourbon.io>

[4] <http://typeplate.com>

[5] <https://github.com/thomas-mcdonald/bootstrap-sass>

edit: typo

------
zekenie
Is it just me or do the new buttons not really fit with everything else. They
look very flat. But most other components have shadows and still look like old
bootstrap

~~~
arb99
Yeah the old buttons looked like buttons, it was obvious they could be
clicked. These ones look more like an outlined header or something. The
disabled ones don't really look disabled if they are not next to a non
disabled button either. Aesthetically I think the current version is much
better. Personally not a huge fan of everything going to this 'flat' / metro
look but it seems to have really caught on.

~~~
sigkill
The "Download Bootstrap Source" button in grey looks disabled.

------
baby
I don't get why they went full flat. It was way more attractive before.

------
kylebrown
How is the touch support now? I was trying to use bootstrap "radio buttons"
the other day, flailed about for several hours (touchend handlers worked for
regular buttons, but not the radio buttons), and they still aren't working on
an iPad.

------
Kiro
The buttons look like they are disabled.

~~~
callahad
More than that, they have a really strange linear gradient on Firefox for
Android. My flight is about to take off, so I can't check on desktop Firefox
or submit a bug report right now. :(

~~~
duncans
Hey everybody, callahad is on a plane!

------
zenocon
why don't they just incorporate font awesome?

~~~
philfreo
They're using Glyphicons which also has a font

------
meunier
Segmented dropdown groups are broken for me in chrome. The drop down is
floating underneath the button.

------
mikegirouard
Something that always bothered me about Bootstrap is that the examples don't
make full use of HTML5, although…

    
    
        Bootstrap makes use of certain HTML elements and CSS
        properties that require the use of the HTML5 doctype. 
        Include it at the beginning of all your projects.
    

The two examples that immediately come to mind are NAVs[1] and progress
bars[2]; HTML5 already defines these elements. Why reinvent the wheel?

[1]: <http://rc.getbootstrap.com/components/#navs> [2]:
<http://rc.getbootstrap.com/components/#progress>

~~~
subsection1h
When I evaluated the use of HTML5 section elements last year, including the
nav element, screen readers didn't support them.[1] Also, there wasn't any
benefit to using HTML5 section elements.

A book named The Truth About HTML5[2] provides additional reasons not to use
HTML section elements.

I've yet to read about any benefits to using HTML5 section elements.

[1] [http://www.accessibleculture.org/articles/2011/10/jaws-ie-
an...](http://www.accessibleculture.org/articles/2011/10/jaws-ie-and-headings-
in-html5/)

[2] <http://www.truthabouthtml5.com/>

------
cheneytsai
Is it meant to be default to full on flat-ui? First impression is that the
buttons are now less apparent interface items and it'll take more careful
layout planning to make a quick bootstrap effective. Thoughts?

------
terrellm
The Responsive Utilities section is interesting with new classes such as
.visible-phone and .hidden-phone (also tablet and desktop) but I find in my
app that my customers want to see all of the columns even if it means a little
bit of scrolling.

Zurb takes an interesting approach with their responsive tables
(<http://www.zurb.com/playground/responsive-tables>).

~~~
mgkimsal
bootstrap 2 (and 1 IIRC) have .visible-/.hidden- classes already - is there
something new?

~~~
terrellm
You are right... my mistake. I was looking on a different page of the old
bootstrap site.

------
tzury
Those new badges are a real nice addition

<http://rc.getbootstrap.com/components/#badges>

~~~
MJR
Are you referring to the addition of active nav states? The rest has been
around for a while:
[http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/components.html#labels-b...](http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/components.html#labels-
badges)

------
iM8t
I actually like the changes. Now everyone will have to do a bit of style
editing before using this. So we won't see so many identical sites.

------
notdonspaulding
The description at the start of the pull request for this work-in-progress
branch is worth a read for understanding the motivations behind most of the
changes.

<https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6342>

It may also help to keep in mind that this is a _preview_. Bootstrap 3 isn't
done yet.

------
mourique
Looking at the grid i noticed the 1-column divs change size. e.g. 41px - 42px
- 41px - 42px - etc. When resizing in smaller displays it behaves different:
25 - 25 - 24 - 25 - 25 - 25- 24 - etc. Was this always the case in bootstrap?
I don't really understand the reason for this. It seems odd.

~~~
gavinballard
I suspect that will be because the primary grid is now based on percentage
values rather than fixed pixel values. When you're splitting a grid into
columns using percentage widths, often the browser has to make a choice
between rounding up or down to the closest pixel value for display.

The fluid grid has long been a part of Bootstrap, but until now has generally
been secondary to the fixed 12-column grid, which used strict pixel values.

------
mratzloff
Mobile first? There are a ton of broken examples on my iPhone (grids, inline
elements, etc.).

~~~
manojlds
That's why it is in preview and not released?

~~~
mratzloff
I'm previewing my new flying car. It doesn't fly yet but it drives great on
the road.

~~~
rschmitty
Except instead of making a "flying first" car from scratch you start with your
existing car as a prototype to build your first "flying first" car that you
plan to give away for free and open source it.

Then all the of flying community come out of the woodwork to cry bloody murder
it isn't flying yet when you just strapped on some wings and aren't finished.
Then you start to wonder if it's worth sharing both the process and the
product in the first place when you have to deal with all the kids out there
who cry as if their lollipop was stolen.

------
babuskov
I like the way tables are handled, it looks so easy now. However, there are
still bugs. Screenshots here:

[http://www.backwardcompatible.net/164-twitter-
bootstrap-3-bu...](http://www.backwardcompatible.net/164-twitter-
bootstrap-3-bugs)

------
gdonelli
Can we make the flat UI optional?

~~~
jasonlotito
[https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6342#issuecomment-...](https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6342#issuecomment-12332378)
Gradients and other embellishments have temporarily been removed while I focus
on other things. It has nothing to do with skeuomorphism or anything like
that.

Also, considering the nature of Bootstrap, the UI design is always optional.

------
nateweiss
Endless props, thanks, and respect to the Bootstrap team. They do an amazing
job, sometimes with less-than-amazing levels of gratitude in return.

------
rip747
i really wish they wouldn't lock form into being horizontal or inline by
putting a class on the form tag itself, but rather by using the fieldset tag.
The whole reason is because sometime when you are doing a large form, some
sections just flow better as an inline rather then a horizontal and vica-
versa. I submitted a ticket about this a while back, but it must have been
overruled.

------
ankit84
One thing I liked most is 'Responsive utilities', no device specific coding.
If you want show sidebar on desktop, drop .visible-desktop.

~~~
tterrace
You can use that now in 2.x:
[http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/scaffolding.html#respons...](http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/scaffolding.html#responsive)

------
woah
Fyi, top nav menu doesn't work on nexus 7

~~~
smonff
Don't support Nexus4 either...

~~~
valinor4
It works on my LG Nexus 4.

------
derwiki
I like the addition of the .btn-block class -- I'll definitely be using that
for mobile optimization!

------
zachdonovan
is the table of contents ordering out of whack for everyone? when I scroll
down the page, the right hand table of contents jumps typography->grid
system->code->tables, even though the menu is laid out as
typography->code->grid system->tables...

------
pistacchioso
I still fail to understand this. What's its purpose? To make all web pages
look the same?

~~~
jaredmcateer
Much in the same way Ruby on Rails made every site work exactly the same. It's
a framework to provide a foundational starting point that is already
consistent rather than trying to build a consistent style guide and toolset
from scratch every time.

------
offdrey
I don't get this flat look, it reminds me of Windows 8. Is it a new trand in
web design?

------
zerop
I see some of bootsnipp's ready made recipes are added in this version.

------
throwawayG9
Modal is still a disaster.

~~~
tonyblundell
Why?

------
pgsch
Will be nice to have a "border-less" class for tables...

------
president
What's with the whitish glow on button text?

~~~
brennanm
It's a dropshadow on the text which makes the button text look embossed when
there is a gradient on the buttons.

There will be gradients on the buttons.

[https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6342#issuecomment-...](https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6342#issuecomment-12332378)

------
arianvanp
Meh. too flat _

~~~
jasonlotito
> Seriously, fuck off with the flat UI already! I can't express it in any more
> politely

Apparently you can.

Regardless: ull/6342#issuecomment-12332378 Gradients and other embellishments
have temporarily been removed while I focus on other things. It has nothing to
do with skeuomorphism or anything like that.

------
w3chybrid
For god's sake, just learn some CSS already.

------
aioprisan
the download link is broken

------
andyl
Mobile first - Yeah! Can anyone compare/constrast the mobilefirst-ness of
Bootstrap3 and Zurb4 ?? Why would I use one vs the other??

~~~
MatthewPhillips
That's a good question that I'd like to see answered. It seems to me that
mobile-first is used as a buzzword here. Unless they are literally inventing
features for the mobile layout and then finding a way to make them work on
desktop -- for example if the navigation bar accordion thing was there before
the full desktop navigation bar.

~~~
jcomis
Not sure what you mean by this. Mobile first just means everything is designed
starting from a mobile view. It's not a "feature" like some sort UI item, it's
a style of design thinking with the goal of ensuring the mobile context is
absolutely as simple as it can be. It's not a buzzword since this is how they
approached this version.

~~~
MatthewPhillips
So what specifically was designed with a mobile view first in Bootstrap 3? I'm
not being argumentative, I just want to know.

~~~
jcomis
Just check out the css, everything starts with the 480 media query and builds
on top of that. CSS is added to the base mobile CSS (which is incredibly
simple) to work as the width goes up. Check v2, it's (almost) completely the
other way around. Again, it's not a specific thing, it's everything.

------
escaped_hn
I don't really like the new buttons. Other than that good job.

------
camus
Is it me or do they use greyish text on white background that makes the whole
thing hard to read ? i'd like to understand , what the hell is that low
contrast trend and how does it make the text more readable ? Designer should
quit it. Are they stupid or what ? Also this flat trend make the design very
poor , but maybe that's the intended effect.

~~~
larrydavid
I think you need to relax. If the design is so poor then customize it. Or even
better, submit a pull request that includes your own brilliant design skills.

------
laureny
So Bootstrap uses proprietary HTML elements, like Angular?

I like both frameworks but is this a trend we should worry about?

~~~
Kudos
Which elements would those be? I can see custom attributes for the javascript
plugins and in that context it's completely fine.

