Introducing
The Slant team built an AI & it’s awesome
Find the best product instantly
Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to Safari
Try it now
4.7 star rating
0
What is the best alternative to MUI CSS?
Ad
Ad
Materialize
All
15
Experiences
Pros
11
Cons
4
Top
Con
Refuses to use the flexbox model
Even though Materialize states that it only supports IE10+, which supports flexbox quite well, with prefixes, Materialize has refused to use Flexbox.
See More
Top
Pro
Great-looking demo
See More
Top
Con
Not maintained anymore
See More
Top
Pro
Device agnostic
Since Materialize follows Google's guidelines for Material design, which in theory is device agnostic, Materialize itself is device agnostic too. It's designed to look good on every device.
See More
Top
Con
Large / heavy
267 kilobytes, minified, for the CSS and JS.
See More
Top
Pro
Large selection of components
CSS components: Badges, buttons, cards, collections, footer, forms, icons, navbar, pagination, preloader. JavaScript components: Collapsible, Dialogs, Dropdown, Media, Modals, Parallax, Pushpin, ScrollFire, Scrollspy, SideNav, Tabs, Transitions, Waves. Mobile-specific: slide-out drawer menu, toasts.
See More
Top
Con
Deprecated
No longer supported by their maintainers.
See More
Top
Pro
Responsive
See More
Top
Pro
Mobile navigation
See More
Top
Pro
Nice showcase of sites built with Materialize
See More
Top
Pro
Customizable
While the default style is not bad at all, Materialize also gives developers the ability to customize it and fit their own style, while still keeping in line with the Material Design philosophy. Along with the CSS files, designers can also download the SASS files which can be edited and compiled.
See More
Top
Pro
12-Column Grid System
See More
Top
Pro
Included icon font
See More
Top
Pro
Meteor.js integration by developers
See More
Top
Pro
Opinionated
Material design is very opinionated on how design elements should behave and look. The basics of which revolve around certain visual elements (physics, space, momentum and light) which are used to create specific UX elements. This is very helpful because it creates a consistent feel without making every design look the same. This can be seen in Materialize too, where each element may be customized but still it keeps the consistent look of the material design.
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
179
85
Material Design Lite
All
4
Experiences
Pros
2
Cons
2
Top
Pro
Developed by Google
Material Design Lite is a framework created by Google, who are also responsible for the creation of Material Design.
See More
Top
Con
Deprecated
No longer maintained
See More
Top
Pro
Very customizable
See More
Top
Con
On limited support
Google moved further development efforts to Material Components for the web.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
51
31
Cirrus
All
5
Experiences
Pros
5
Top
Pro
Supports Flexbox and CSS Grid
Supports both Flexbox and CSS grid making it a great modern choice for designing web apps.
See More
Top
Pro
CSS Only
No additional JS/jQuery required to use.
See More
Top
Pro
Mobile Responsive
Extremely responsive and supports many smaller screens.
See More
Top
Pro
Open Source
Open source and quite actively maintained on Github.
See More
Top
Pro
Lightweight
Much smaller than Bootstrap with just as much flexibility.
See More
Hide
Free
19
2
Angular Material
All
7
Experiences
Pros
5
Cons
2
Top
Con
Latest versions docs are incomplete
The previous version had nice docs. The new one has almost nothing. And the library has changed wildly so the old docs are no use.
See More
Top
Pro
Very optimized
See More
Top
Con
Not that customizable
The use of the library can be very hard for beginners, but it gets very good when you know the features.
See More
Top
Pro
Accessibility in mind
See More
Top
Pro
Made for Angular
See More
Top
Pro
Multiple theme support
See More
Top
Pro
Themeable
You can create your own themes using the SCSS toolkit.
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
free
8
1
Polymer
All
12
Experiences
Pros
10
Cons
1
Specs
Top
Pro
Various basic components
It provides a base component.
See More
Top
Con
No server-side rendering
Polymer does not support server-side rendering. This results in higher loading times, more HTTP requests and it's not very SEO friendly, since search engines have no way of indexing a page if it's not rendered in the server.
See More
Top
Pro
HTML markup is not string
HTML markup as it can be a non-string.
See More
Top
Pro
Flex layout components
It provides Flex layout components.
See More
Top
Pro
CSS is easy to apply
CSS can be applied far more comfortably than React.
See More
Top
Pro
No need for special debugging tools
The presence od specialized debugging tools are advertised by competitors. The all features of web components are natively supported by browser embedded development tools.
See More
Top
Pro
Excellent routing
The router is embedded into CLI for project creation and covers as web as Progressive web app, also fused with Polymer layouts out of the box. The shop template for CLI has a complete solution including the routing.
See More
Top
Pro
Complete web app stack support
Full app stack from data tier to routing, progressive web app, responsive layouts makes no need to seek outside of Polymer ecosystem for application features. In addition to waste set of mature web components in Polymer Elements along with Vaadin Elements there are thousands of web components in the wild comparable to jQuery plugins set.
See More
Top
Pro
Excellent documentation
Polymer guides you as with tools (cli, build environment, app templates,..) as with complimentary documentation on all phases of app development from creation of app as progresive web app to production deployment instructions. As Polymer is standards based, the whole community around those standards also helping in documentation and support.
See More
Top
Pro
Based on web components
Web Components are a collection of specifications released by W3C as a way to reduce the complexity of web apps by creating reusable components. Browser support is currently poor for web components, however Polymer is developed to make web components compatible with modern browsers.
See More
Top
Pro
API is easy to understand, based on standard
The Polymer APIs are split on application layers and follow standards on all possible ways: Web Components, CSS variables, async API via Promises and so on.
See More
Specs
v1.0 GZipped size:
53K
v2.0 GZipped size (Safari):
13K
v2.0 GZipped size (Chrome):
10K
v2.0 GZipped size (Edge):
36K
See All Specs
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
101
22
Material Components for the Web
All
4
Experiences
Pros
2
Cons
2
Top
Pro
Developed by Google
"Material Components for the Web" is a framework created by Google, creators of the Material Design.
See More
Top
Con
Relies on LOTS of sass
If you're not familiar with using sass, this isn't recommended. You need to set up a build system, and it's just a pain.
See More
Top
Pro
Customization and Theming
You can make it look exactly like you want it to.
See More
Top
Con
Too hard to learn
See More
Hide
Get it
here
12
4
UiKit
All
12
Experiences
Pros
7
Cons
5
Top
Con
Messy code classes
Nested classes become complicated to read to obtain desired result.
See More
Top
Pro
Well architected
The code is pretty clean and follows well-defined conventions.
See More
Top
Con
Not very popular
UiKit is not a very popular framework, especially compared to other options. As such it may be hard to find learning resources other than the official documentation or it may be more likely for development of UiKit to be dropped than for another more popular framework
See More
Top
Pro
Ready to use themes available
There are plenty of ready to use themes available from the official website. You can choose the theme that you want to use from the dropdown menu and then download the CSS, LESS or SASS file for that theme to use for the website.
See More
Top
Con
Slow development
New features and updates trickle out over 6-12 month development cycles, bug fixes are more frequent but very slow and selective as well.
See More
Top
Pro
Easy to use.
When using UIKit classes, it is used with the ui- prefix which is very good. Components are explained straight-forward.
See More
Top
Con
Pre-built starter templates are now behind a paywall
Easier to use Joomla! or Wordpress starter templates without paying money for it.
See More
Top
Pro
Built-in animation capabilities
UiKit has some built-in animation features which can be used to animate various components.
See More
Top
Con
Closed development
Development is mostly done in-house and not publicly available.
See More
Top
Pro
Great style even out of the box
UiKit has a pretty good and clean style even out of the box without any customization needed.
See More
Top
Pro
Very customizable
UiKit's rather minimal style can be easily customizable to create an entirely new look to fit the needs of the designer.
See More
Top
Pro
Extremely modular
Every aspect of the framework is designed to be modular, this way designers can easily choose which components to add to their stylesheet without risking to damage the overall style.
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
163
67
Skeleton
All
6
Experiences
Pros
5
Cons
1
Top
Con
Not maintained anymore
No active development for two years.
See More
Top
Pro
Lightweight
See More
Top
Pro
Responsive grid
See More
Top
Pro
Style agnostic
See More
Top
Pro
Vanilla CSS
No bells and whistles for Skeleton, it's just CSS.
See More
Top
Pro
Media queries
See More
Hide
Get it
here
68
37
Material UI
All
3
Experiences
Pros
2
Cons
1
Top
Pro
Adheres really well to the material design standard
Really nice implementation so far
See More
Top
Con
Active development means API changes are frequent
Might be a problem for large projects, but since active development is a good thing, you should consider this rather mild inconvenience weighed against the benefits.
See More
Top
Pro
Perfect for React projects
Really convenient and easy to use components
See More
Hide
0
25
23
Built By the Slant team
Find the best product instantly.
4.7 star rating
Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to Safari
Try it now - it's free
{}
undefined
url next
price drop