I like the look, and will definitely be using it in internal projects and prototypes.
I found it a bit hard to read super light gray on somewhat light gray or plain white background(quotations, dropdown). I think a little more contrast is required. The default button, especially when used on similar colored background(forms), has the same issue.
I understand they are going for the metro look, but adding a drop shadow to actionable items(buttons) while the not-clickable items remain flat(alert; element not clickable but the cross) will help mitigate some end-user confusion.
I love bootswatch and would happily pay $5-$10 a month for regular swatches like this uploaded every few days / week, I'm not a designer nor do I want to spend time trying to be, bootstrap + bootswatch give me the ability to get something up ,running and looking pretty damn good very quickly.
I agree. wrapbootstrap is going in this direction, but they seem to have had the same ~dozen themes since they started out. I'd love for more really talented designers to create bootstrap themes -- non-designers are hungry for them. I'm particularly interested in bootstrap themes that make good use of creative typographic elements.
A subscription service would be very interesting, and if it were a reputable designer, I'd sign up in a second.
My biggest complaint about WarpBootstrap is that few if any themes have *.less support. This makes is much hard to use themes except as is. It also makes upgrading bootstrap more of a pain in the ass.
Having some sort of git integration would also make upgrading the theme and bootstrap itself easier too.
It might seem like that because the front page is usually locked down by the most popular themes, but the site has around 330 or so now. Or did you mean it another way?
You're right. I apologize. Last time I flipped through wrapbootstrap, it seemed there were only a dozen or so themes. But I was wrong, I was only looking at the most popular themes and failed to notice the others. It looks like you've got a lot of nice new themes. I look forward to checking them out.
...the buttons aren't apparently clickable. I embrace the shift away from excessive skeuomorphism as much as anybody but failing to provide affordances is inexcusable.
I sense a little sarcasm in your otherwise short and great comment, but let me tell you, rounded borders can be abused and combined with more intensive border colors, they can be downright frustrating to look at.
I personally found that a border radius of 1-3 pixels is usually a nice touch, but anything more than that should be added carefully.
Windows Phone debuted in February of 2010, the Kennedization process didn't start until summer 11. Google's redesign was more influenced by Metro than the other way around.
It's interesting that people are still calling it "Metro", even after Microsoft was told to stop (because of a trademark issue). Microsoft stopped, but the rest of the world didn't, apparently. I know I didn't. It's a great name.
Can the company that went after Microsoft (Metro AG) go after other people besides Microsoft?
You know when we built [PDFzen](https://pdfzen.com), we used Bootstrap and made it Metro-esque. I wish we'd have had something like this for the homepage. It certainly would've sped things up.
Its only me? or i´m the only one here to think that Metro UI is corny like the 80´s ?
i think that as time goes by, people will be ashamed of using this as they were ashamed about their hair style in their pictures from the 80´s :)
I think I feel the opposite. In general I think that simple-looking designs hold up over time better than more elaborate (can I still say skeumorphic?) ones.
If it's a good site, it could be black and white for all I care. If it's not, a trendy design would make it only worse - now, that's something to be ashamed of, IMHO.
Very nice! I've been waiting for something like this. There are other metro themes for bootstrap, but they're a bit over the top and try to replicate the metro GUI on the PC/tablet.
Not all that Metroy, as someone who spent all summer straight immersed in Metro.
Also, I wish Foundation would get 1% of the attention Bootstrap does. Once you figure out how to get past their docs-light into the full docs, I've found it to be FAR faster to work with than Bootstrap.
I've used both. However, I used Foundation early on and I heard it's gotten much better.
I used Bootstrap for a few projects and found out it can be a huge pain trying to eliminate all the cruft you don't need. Sure, you can build a custom package, but there's a ton of CSS which I will never have a need for. Also, the signature bootstrap dropdown menu on mobile devices really got to me since you see it EVERYWHERE now.
My solution was to go with Skeleton and a minimal responsive navigation I built from scratch.
It will get the attention if it is a better product. There is no nefarious reason why Bootstrap is getting more attention than most other HTML/CSS scaffolds.
Oh i don't know, the 800lbs gorilla that is twitter? Inertia? Laziness? Crowd mentality? I don't know why people think life/business is always a meritocracy. It usually isn't.
I tried Foundation coming from Bootstrap and found that Bootstrap was much easier to use. Foundation did not have simple documentation and configuration was complicated.
Oh I didn't mean to imply that there was some evil force pushing Bootstrap. Also, I don't know whether you're being naive or idealistic but "the better product" doesn't always win. Bootstrap has a lot of momentum (not to discount the value of that) but that doesn't mean it's superior to Foundation.
I dunno, write a blog post about why you like it and post that here? A quick search shows only one post about Foundation, with someone linking the project's front page.
