StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. DevOps
  3. Build Automation
  4. Package Managers
  5. Bower vs Yeoman

Bower vs Yeoman

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Bower
Bower
Stacks6.4K
Followers4.5K
Votes927
GitHub Stars14.9K
Forks1.8K
Yeoman
Yeoman
Stacks1.7K
Followers1.3K
Votes396
GitHub Stars10.1K
Forks730

Bower vs Yeoman: What are the differences?

## Key Differences between Bower and Yeoman

Bower is a package manager primarily used for managing front-end dependencies, while Yeoman is a scaffolding tool that helps generate the basic structure for web applications.
Bower focuses on installing client-side packages and managing their versions, making it more suitable for managing dependencies such as JavaScript libraries and frameworks. On the other hand, Yeoman helps developers kickstart projects by providing generators for various project structures and configurations. 
Bower requires manual configuration and installation of packages, whereas Yeoman automates the setup process by generating code and configurations based on predefined templates and settings. 
Bower operates on a per-package basis and does not include additional functionality like code generation or build processes, which are core features of Yeoman.
Yeoman includes a wide range of generators for different types of applications like web, mobile, and even full-stack projects, making it versatile for various development needs. In contrast, Bower is focused solely on package management and does not provide scaffolding capabilities for project initialization.
Bower is a lightweight tool designed for simple package management tasks, while Yeoman is more comprehensive and incorporates additional functionalities like build tools, testing frameworks, and project structuring capabilities.

In Summary, Bower is a package manager for front-end dependencies, whereas Yeoman is a scaffolding tool that facilitates project initialization and code generation for web applications. Yeoman offers a broader set of features beyond package management, making it a more comprehensive development tool. 

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

Bower
Bower
Yeoman
Yeoman

Bower is a package manager for the web. It offers a generic, unopinionated solution to the problem of front-end package management, while exposing the package dependency model via an API that can be consumed by a more opinionated build stack. There are no system wide dependencies, no dependencies are shared between different apps, and the dependency tree is flat.

Yeoman is a robust and opinionated set of tools, libraries, and a workflow that can help developers quickly build beautiful, compelling web apps. It is comprised of yo - a scaffolding tool using our generator system, grunt - a task runner for your build process and bower for dependency management.

Bower operates at a lower level than previous attempts at client-side package management – such as Jam, Volo, or Ender. These managers could consume Bower as a dependency.;Bower's aim is simply to install packages, resolve dependencies from a bower.json, check versions, and then provide an API which reports on these things. Nothing more. This is a major diversion from past attempts at browser package management.;Bower offers a generic, unopinionated solution to the problem of package management, while exposing an API that can be consumed by a more opinionated build stack.
Lightning-fast scaffolding — Easily scaffold new projects with customizable templates (e.g HTML5 Boilerplate, Bootstrap), RequireJS and more.;Great build process — Not only do you get minification and concatenation; I also optimize all your image files, HTML, compile your CoffeeScript and Compass files, if you're using AMD, I will pass those modules through r.js so you don't have to.;Automatically compile CoffeeScript & Compass — Our LiveReload watch process automatically compiles source files and refreshes your browser whenever a change is made so you don't have to.;Automatically lint your scripts — All your scripts are automatically run against JSHint to ensure they're following language best-practices.;Built-in preview server — No more having to fire up your own HTTP Server. My built-in one can be fired with just one command.;Awesome Image Optimization — I optimize all your images using OptiPNG and JPEGTran so your users can spend less time downloading assets and more time using your app.;Killer package management — Need a dependency? It's just a keystroke away. I allow you to easily search for new packages via the command-line (e.g. `bower search jquery`), install them and keep them updated without needing to open your browser.;PhantomJS Unit Testing — Easily run your unit tests in headless WebKit via PhantomJS. When you create a new application, I also include some test scaffolding for your app.
Statistics
GitHub Stars
14.9K
GitHub Stars
10.1K
GitHub Forks
1.8K
GitHub Forks
730
Stacks
6.4K
Stacks
1.7K
Followers
4.5K
Followers
1.3K
Votes
927
Votes
396
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 483
    Package management
  • 214
    Open source
  • 142
    Simple
  • 53
    Great for for project dependencies injection
  • 27
    Web components with Meteor
Cons
  • 2
    Deprecated
  • 1
    Front end only
Pros
  • 121
    Lightning-fast scaffolding
  • 83
    Automation
  • 78
    Great build process
  • 57
    Open source
  • 49
    Yo
Cons
  • 1
    Even harder to debug than Javascript
Integrations
No integrations available
Grunt
Grunt

What are some alternatives to Bower, Yeoman?

Meteor

Meteor

A Meteor application is a mix of JavaScript that runs inside a client web browser, JavaScript that runs on the Meteor server inside a Node.js container, and all the supporting HTML fragments, CSS rules, and static assets.

Elm

Elm

Writing HTML apps is super easy with elm-lang/html. Not only does it render extremely fast, it also quietly guides you towards well-architected code.

Julia

Julia

Julia is a high-level, high-performance dynamic programming language for technical computing, with syntax that is familiar to users of other technical computing environments. It provides a sophisticated compiler, distributed parallel execution, numerical accuracy, and an extensive mathematical function library.

Racket

Racket

It is a general-purpose, multi-paradigm programming language based on the Scheme dialect of Lisp. It is designed to be a platform for programming language design and implementation. It is also used for scripting, computer science education, and research.

PureScript

PureScript

A small strongly typed programming language with expressive types that compiles to JavaScript, written in and inspired by Haskell.

Composer

Composer

It is a tool for dependency management in PHP. It allows you to declare the libraries your project depends on and it will manage (install/update) them for you.

pnpm

pnpm

It uses hard links and symlinks to save one version of a module only ever once on a disk. When using npm or Yarn for example, if you have 100 projects using the same version of lodash, you will have 100 copies of lodash on disk. With pnpm, lodash will be saved in a single place on the disk and a hard link will put it into the node_modules where it should be installed.

Bun

Bun

Develop, test, run, and bundle JavaScript & TypeScript projects—all with Bun. Bun is an all-in-one JavaScript runtime & toolkit designed for speed, complete with a bundler, test runner, and Node.js-compatible package manager.

Homebrew

Homebrew

Homebrew installs the stuff you need that Apple didn’t. Homebrew installs packages to their own directory and then symlinks their files into /usr/local.

fpm

fpm

It helps you build packages quickly and easily (Packages like RPM and DEB formats).

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Graphite
Kibana

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana