When we talk about modern web development, CSS frameworks are inevitably mentioned. Two popular drivers, Bootstrap and Tailwind CSS, are often placed side by side on the scales.
The secret of size under the hood
When we talk about modern web development, CSS frameworks are inevitably mentioned. Two popular drivers, Bootstrap and Tailwind CSS, are often placed side by side on the scales. Although you can work effectively with both, an important technical difference immediately catches your eye: the final CSS file for Tailwind pages in general much smaller.
But why is that so? How does Tailwind make the end result so optimized? The answer lies in the fundamentally different philosophies of the two frameworks.
The Tailwind CSS approach: Chef à la carte
The Tailwind CSS is a so-called ‘utility-first’ framework. Imagine a huge, professional kitchen pantry where you can find all the ingredients and spices you need, separately, in small jars. This chamber is the development environment for Tailwind CSS itself.
- The huge toolkit: During development, Tailwind provides a huge CSS file full of tiny, single-task utilities. Examples include flex (for flexbox), pt-4 (for padding-top setting), or bg-red-500 (for a specific red background color).
- Compilation of the ‘recipe’: When you write HTML code, you, the chef, choose from these tiny class materials to put together your design, or ‘recipe’.
- The magic: the translation process: When you're done with the work, Tailwind is modern, Just-in-Time (JIT) Your translator will look at all your HTML, JavaScript and other project files. It's like a precise kitchen assistant checking your recipe item by item, taking only the ingredients you really needed out of the pantry.
- The final result: The output file, i.e. the CSS file downloaded to the visitor's browser Only the styles you use will be included.. Everything else, the rest of the huge chamber, remains intact and does not burden the final product.
The Bootstrap approach: The buffet menu
Bootstrap, on the other hand, is an component-based framework. Here you do not work with small ingredients, but you get pre-made, complex dishes.
Think of it as an all-you-can-eat buffet. All the styles of the entire menu bar – buttons, cards, modal windows, navigation bars – are in front of you in one large package. When you load the Bootstrap CSS, you basically bring the whole buffet to your table, regardless of whether you end up eating just one sandwich.
This approach allows for extremely fast prototyping, but comfort comes at a price: The size of the CSS file will be much larger, as it will contain the styles of all possible components, even those that you will never display on your site.
Summary: Dynamic vs. Static
The key is the difference between a dynamic and static approach:
- Tailwind CSS (Dynamic): Dynamically, based on your specific needs generates the final CSS file. The size shall be proportional to the number of classes used.
- Bootstrap (Static): A static, pre-translated, all-inclusive provides a package. The size is fixed no matter how much you use it.
Thanks to this, the final CSS file size of websites made with Tailwind is drastically smaller, which Faster loading time, better user experience and better Google PageSpeed results. This is a huge advantage in a modern, performance-oriented web.
