CSS Frameworks _2026-2040

Table of Contents

Framework	Stats	2011	2016	2017	2020	2025	🚥	2026	2030	2040
Tailwind		—	—	🚀	25%	75%	🟢	82%	88%	95%
Bootstrap		🚀	52%	64%	82%	54%	🟠	48%	35%	20%
Semantic niche:
Pico		—	—	—	🚀	5%	🟢	7%	12%	18%
Becoming legacy:
Bulma		—	🚀	12%	24%	9%	🔴	7%	4%	—
Foundation		🚀	24%	27%	21%	7%	🔴	6%	3%	—

Percentages represent developer adoption rates for each CSS framework. Percentages don't sum to 100% because developers often use multiple frameworks across different projects or simultaneously. Historical data (2011-2025) is based on developer surveys; future projections (2026-2040) are estimates based on current trends.

Trends #

• Tailwind 🚀 growing rapidly as the industry standard for new projects (utility-first approach offers superior flexibility and customization)
• Bootstrap 📉 declining despite large legacy base (developers favor less opinionated, more customizable solutions)
• Bulma and Foundation 📉 phasing out, becoming niche-only
• Pico 📈 emerging as the favorite for minimalist, semantic-first projects (classless design simplifies development for small sites and documentation)

History #

Before standard frameworks like Bootstrap, early CSS development was characterized by "Reset" files and Grid-only libraries designed to fix browser inconsistencies.

Here are the first major CSS frameworks and their release dates:

The Pre-Framework Era (2004–2006) #

Before full frameworks, developers released "Reset" scripts to clear browser-default styling.

• YUI CSS Reset (Yahoo!): Released in 2004 as part of the Yahoo! User Interface Library.
• Meyer Reset: Created by Eric Meyer and published in 2007, it became the industry standard for starting a clean slate.

The First Actual Frameworks (2007–2010) #

These libraries introduced the concept of a "Grid System" and pre-built typography.

The Modern Era (2011–2017) #

These frameworks shifted the industry toward responsive design and comprehensive UI components.

• Bootstrap: First released by Twitter (Jacob Thornton and Mark Otto) in August 2011. It is the most successful CSS framework in history.
• Foundation: Released by ZURB in September 2011, shortly after Bootstrap, focusing on being "mobile-first" and highly customizable.
• Skeleton: Released in 2011 as a "boilerplate" for very simple, lightweight responsive sites.

The Utility-First Revolution (2017–Present) #

While Bootstrap and Tailwind CSS are often framed as rivals, Bootstrap didn't "compete" with Tailwind in a traditional sense. Instead, Bootstrap evolved to adopt some of Tailwind's best ideas once the "utility-first" trend became too big to ignore.

Here is how the relationship played out:

1. The Philosophical Shift #

For years, Bootstrap's philosophy was component-first: you get a pre-styled .btn or .navbar. Tailwind (released in 2017) introduced a utility-first philosophy: instead of a button class, you use dozens of small classes like bg-blue-500 px-4 py-2 rounded.

2. Bootstrap’s Response: Version 5 #

As Tailwind gained massive traction between 2019 and 2021, the Bootstrap team realized developers wanted more granular control. In Bootstrap 5 (2021), they made major changes that look like a direct response to Tailwind’s success:

• The Utility API: Bootstrap added a powerful Sass-based system that allows developers to generate their own utility classes, mirroring Tailwind’s flexibility.
• Expanded Utilities: They significantly increased the number of out-of-the-box utility classes (spacing, colors, positioning) to allow for "utility-only" styling without touching the pre-built components.
• Dropping jQuery: Tailwind's lightweight, modern feel put pressure on Bootstrap to modernize. Removing jQuery in v5 was a move to stay competitive in the modern JavaScript ecosystem (React/Vue).

3. Coexistence vs. Competition #

Rather than trying to "kill" Tailwind, Bootstrap pivoted to become a hybrid.

• Bootstrap remains the king of speed: It’s still better for internal tools, prototypes, or developers who don't want to design every shadow and margin from scratch.
• Tailwind won the design battle: It’s the go-to for bespoke, high-end custom UIs where you want zero "Bootstrap-look" leftovers.

Summary of Differences #