10 Popular CSS Frameworks to Use in Your Web Design

Jan 2019

Posted by: Category:Web Design & Development

The cascading style sheet (CSS) frameworks are scripts meant to allow easier and more standard-compliant web design, Many professional web design company make use of these frameworks. It helps to speed up your website development, allows for cross-browser functionality & enforces good website design habits.

When frameworks are used in website development, they have their advantages as briefly mentioned above, there are some disadvantages as well but the aim of this write up is to talk about ten popular CSS frameworks you can use in designing your website.

  • 1. Bootstrap:

    This is one of the most reliable, most commonly used, and fully-fleshed out CSS frameworks. It is the most popular mobile-first responsive framework online used on almost 4% of websites on the entire web. Bootstrap has a huge community of users from where you can learn from other users, so it will be hard to have an issue that somebody has not detailed in the community.

  • 2. Foundation:

    This is also a mobile-first responsive CSS framework just like Bootstrap but with some differences. Foundation is less opinionated than Bootstrap, and that can be a good or bad attribute depending on your priorities in the website development. One notable feature in Foundation is the built-in REMs instead of pixels, which allows users to state percentages instead of strict measurements. And just like Bootstrap, the default installation can be bulky, so you may select the components you want to include in the download.

  • 3. Semantic User Interface (UI):

    Semantic UI is a front end framework uniquely built to enhance website development or designers with a shared vocabulary around UI. This functions much more than CSS libraries. And if you want a huge range of already great looking components, just go for Semantic UI.

  • 4. Spectre:

    It is one of the most lightweight front-end frameworks available for affordable custom web design. Due to its size, loading of websites made with it is always fast on various devices. The styling in it is basic compared with those of Bootstrap or Foundation, although very consistent.

  • 5. Bulma:

    This is an open source CSS framework which is built with SASS and full flexbox integration. The three main selling points of Bulma include its modern cross-browser compatibility, its small file size and its ease of learning.

  • 6. Materialize:

    This is a starter framework based on Google’s material design. It provides a device agnostic style framework and has low compatibility with Internet Explorer 10+. It also lacks the potential for future cross-browser compatibility.

  • 7. UIKit:

    UIKit is a modular front end framework which is built to help establish fast, robust, and modern looking pages and applications. It has a large file size just like Bootstrap or Foundation. It also has one of the largest ranges of UI and interactivity components from which users can choose which they wish to put in the development of their site.

  • 8. Kube:

    This is a relatively lightweight CSS and JS framework. Kube has a unique focus on typography, minimalism, and performance. Its file size is not small neither is it big like those of Bootstrap. Also, it is built on flexbox and provides support for Internet Explorer 10+.

  • 9. Material Design Lite:

    This is a material design inspired front-end framework which takes a lighter weight approach. Material design lite does not need a JavaScript framework during styling and has a small file size. One of its disadvantages is that it is only built for static web pages and apps and not for the dynamic ones.

  • 10. Mini.css:

    It is just like the opposite of Semantic UI in that it offers a solid flexbox based and responsive CSS framework that comes in very tiny file size. It is one of the smallest CSS libraries but works as expected on most browsers. One of its disadvantages is the fact that it does not have a huge community for troubleshooting help.

Leave a Reply