If you are looking for light-weight (no Jquery) and flexible alternatives to Bootstrap, you might also like utility toolkit (combine classes for flexible design systems) like Tachyon (<a href="http://tachyons.io/" rel="nofollow">http://tachyons.io/</a>) or TailwindCSS (<a href="https://tailwindcss.com/" rel="nofollow">https://tailwindcss.com/</a>). These toolkits have sped up my webdev while make me feel like really controlling what I do (Bootstrap always felt like working against the system when customizing stuff)
Bulma is great. But it occupies an awkward position sandwiched between Bootstrap and CSS grid.<p>If you only need to support modern browsers, grid is the most attractive and powerful option. And if you need to support old IE, you probably need a pre-flexbox solution. So the use case for Bulma is a bit limited these days. Or at least that's the conclusion I reached when pondering using it.
251 instances of `!important`. This feels like strong opinionation to me. When you need to start customizing this framework, there will be some hoops to jump through in order to maintain upgrade-ability of the underlying file itself.
Just started a landing page for a side project today with bulma: <a href="https://nodablock.com/" rel="nofollow">https://nodablock.com/</a><p>I'm not a frontend/design guy at all, and remember CSS as something really troublesome just to center things...
With bulma, I didn't touch a line of css, and had something responsive without thinking much! I'm really satisfied with the results and the time spent to do it (about 2 hours). What's also great is that it helps keep the design consistent. Hopefully it will stay as good with the main dashboard I'm building. It definitely gave a boost to my ego, and makes me even more excited about pursuing the project!<p>Any feedbacks on how to improve that?
I just moved from Bootstrap to Bulma. Initially just because I didn't want to use jquery anymore and I like that Bulma is only CSS.<p>Having made the switch though, I couldn't be happier. Everything just feels so much easier with Bulma. And Bulma's use of flexbox makes horizontal alignment & vertical centering ridiculously easy.<p>Highly recommend trying it out. Can be learned in minutes effectively.
I ended up almost entirely skipping over Flexbox in favor of Grid. I understand a lot of developers transitioned through Flexbox and or still primarily use it, however I'm curious where a Flexbox framework fits into the future given the rapid adoption of Grid that is occuring. It seems clear that Grid is going to overwhelm Flexbox adoption and make it entirely pointless. Why would someone choose to adopt Bulma now?
I am just trying it out for my side project (<a href="https://www.gettandem.com" rel="nofollow">https://www.gettandem.com</a>) and liking it so far, however the time will tell... (it's WIP so nothing is polished).<p>I was considering either no framework (as before), Tachyons and Bulma. After quick demo of moving one page to Bulma I liked it enough to give it a go.<p>To the argument of CSS grid vs flexbox, as others already mentioned, it's kind of implementation detail from the user point of view.
Bulma is really nive, I am creating a React component library wrapping it <a href="http://g14n.info/trunx" rel="nofollow">http://g14n.info/trunx</a>
After painfully looking for a grid system for a while, we decided to ditch bootstrap and the idea of a using a css-library and to simply use styled-components, some defined breakpoint strings and flexbox and couldn't be happier.
We built <a href="https://jobs.coderfit.com" rel="nofollow">https://jobs.coderfit.com</a> using it and are really happy about the usability especially for not so "frontend-talented" developers.
I really dislike how Bulma doesn't style html elements by default, instead requiring things like<p><input class="input" ..../><p>Why not just target input elements with some sensible default styling?