Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Material UI vs Materialize: What are the differences?
Introduction
Material UI and Materialize are both popular front-end frameworks that implement Material Design principles. While they share some similarities, there are key differences between the two that set them apart in terms of features, customization options, and community support.
Component library: Material UI offers a comprehensive and extensive library of pre-built components that can be easily customized to fit specific design requirements. On the other hand, Materialize provides a smaller set of components but focuses on simplicity and ease of use.
Styling approach: Material UI follows a JSS (JavaScript Style Sheets) approach, allowing developers to style components using JavaScript objects. This provides greater flexibility and allows for dynamic styling based on props or state. Materialize, on the other hand, uses CSS classes for styling components, which may be more familiar to developers with a background in traditional CSS.
Themes and customization: Material UI provides robust theming options, allowing developers to easily create and customize themes to match their branding. It offers a wide range of built-in themes and also supports creating custom themes. Materialize, on the other hand, provides limited theming options and customization is primarily limited to changing a few color variables.
Size and performance: Material UI has a larger footprint compared to Materialize due to its extensive set of components and features. This can lead to slower loading times and slightly increased bundle sizes. Materialize, on the other hand, has a smaller size and is relatively lightweight, making it a good choice for projects where performance is a priority.
Community and ecosystem: Material UI has a larger and more active community, with a wealth of resources, documentation, and third-party libraries available. It is widely used and actively maintained, ensuring regular updates and bug fixes. Materialize also has a decent community, but it is not as extensive or active as Material UI's.
Accessibility support: Material UI emphasizes accessibility and provides built-in support for common accessibility features like keyboard navigation, screen reader compatibility, and ARIA attributes. Materialize also supports accessibility features, but it may require some additional customization and configuration to ensure optimal accessibility compliance.
In summary, Material UI and Materialize are both solid choices for implementing Material Design in web projects, but they differ in terms of the component library, styling approach, customization options, size and performance, community support, and accessibility focus.
My React website is a simple 5-pager that attaches to a database to store and display registrations and other data. The user (small user base) can change any form elements, but I don't need theme-ing, though that would be fun for the user. reactstrap/react-bootstrap built on Bootstrap 4 sounds dated. I am familiar with reactstrap, but a friend said to try Material-UI. The thought of learning it is interesting, but somehow I think it might be overkill. So... reactstrap, react-bootstrap, or Material UI, which should I use?
MaterialUI may be overkill for such a simple project, you're right. So I'm recommending both tools in this StackShare form.
But if it's planned to increase the project, consider migrating it to MUI in advance. Among its pros I can name: - brilliant TS support - all popular use cases covered - well documented - backed by sponsors == will live and be maintained
I recommend Material-UI for a couple reasons. 1. It’s very easy to throw MUI into React. You can essentially just import the components you need in place of yours. Effectively, for a button, for example, you can swap out <button for MUI’s <Button and you can be done if that’s all you want. Looks great, no hassle, and they have simple guides to help you make good UI decisions on top of that. 2. It’s pretty up-to-date, and it has great docs. I use MUI all the time, and if I were doing a simple, small user-base app, I would definitely use it for the sake of convenience and speed of development.
I've used material UI and had great success with it on React projects. Semantic UI is also another great option https://semantic-ui.com/.
When you say its "overkill", I would think long term. I do a lot of small projects not only for the purpose of the project, but also for learning, future projects and to use professionaly. It's a long-term investment.
Material-UI looks great and is easy to use. Highly recommended, my favourite UI framework for React.
Much more modern in terms on support for css in js. But go for v5 not v4 as material-ui is going through a transition in term of its own implementation
Material-UI is the good choice for a small project. It's fast for development, maintenance, and is ready to use. It HaveMaterial-UI is the good choice for a small project. It's fast for development, maintenance, and is ready to use. Has an excellent documentation with pratic examples.
Chakra UI seems like the perfect fit in my opinion. It has a much powerful design system, all the necessary components and it is dead simple to learn. And pretty easy to customize too.
It's totally the design decision if you like to follow bootstrap design then you should go for reactstrap. But if you want to follow google material design then you should go for material ui.
Bootstrap is useful for rapid prototyping using an existing design system. Since the design system can be used in standard HTML + Javascript and can be imported for free into a Figma project, it lowers the complexity of our mock-up creation and frontend styling, all while promoting consistency. We did not choose Material UI, because it does not have a free design system to import into Figma.
I replaced Bootstrap with Material-UI during the front-end UI development, because Material-UI adopts a component-based importing style, making it suit well in a "React programming style". This makes me comfortable when programming because I can treat importing UI components as other React components I define.
As our team will be building a web application, HTML5 and CSS3 are one of the standardized combinations to implement the structure and the styling of a webpage. Material-UI comes with all sorts of predesigned web components such as buttons and dropdowns that will save us tons of development time. Since it is a component library designed for React, it suits our needs. However, we do acknowledge that predesigned components may sometimes cause pains especially when it comes to custom styling. To make our life even easier, we also adopted Tailwind CSS. It is a CSS framework providing low-level utility classes that will act as building blocks when we create custom designs.
Fonts and typography are fun. Material Design is a framework (developed by Google) that basically geeks out on how to assemble your typographical elements together into a design language. If you're into fonts and typography, it's fantastic. It provides a theming engine, reusable components, and can pull different user interfaces together under a common design paradigm. I'd highly recommend looking into Borries Schwesinger's book "The Form Book" if you're going to be working with Material UI or are otherwise new to component design.
https://www.amazon.com/Form-Book-Creating-Printed-Online/dp/0500515085
Pros of Material-UI
- React141
- Material Design82
- Ui components60
- CSS framework30
- Component26
- Looks great15
- Responsive13
- Good documentation12
- LESS9
- Ui component8
- Open source7
- Flexible6
- Code examples6
- JSS5
- Supports old browsers out of the box3
- Interface3
- Angular3
- Very accessible3
- Fun3
- Typescript support2
- # of components2
- Designed for Server Side Rendering2
- Support for multiple styling systems1
- Accessibility1
- Easy to work with1
- Css1
Pros of Materialize
- Google material design102
- Easy to use74
- Responsive74
- Modern looks54
- Open source48
- Good documentation42
- Code examples37
- Extremely light - 29kb29
- Flexible28
- Great Support15
- It looks beautiful10
- Very nice looking components to quickly build out8
- Smooth animation7
- Great Grid System6
- Great4
- Ruby gem to integrate in 2 seconds flat4
- Angular2 Support3
- MIT Lisence2
- Friendly api, easy setup, good documentation2
- Easy setup2
- React1
- Grid system1
- Because of the easy to use and very editable library1
- Responsivness1
- Jibberish1
- Friendly Api1
- Better class name0
- Rtl support0
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Material-UI
- Hard to learn. Bad documentation36
- Hard to customize29
- Hard to understand Docs22
- Bad performance9
- Extra library needed for date/time pickers7
- For editable table component need to use material-table7
- Typescript Support2
- # of components1
Cons of Materialize
- Mobile errors7
- Poor Grid System6
- Unmaintained2
