Software Alternatives & Startups
Register | Login

Materialize CSS VS Classic Shell

Compare Materialize CSS VS Classic Shell and see what are their differences

Materialize CSS

A modern responsive front-end framework based on Material Design

Materialize CSS Landing page
Rating
0 reviews
Pricing
Open source
Alternatives Is it good?
Classic Shell

Classic Shell was developed for Windows 8 since that was the first version of the popular operating system to forgo the iconic Start menu.

Classic Shell Landing page
Rating
0 reviews
Pricing
Open source
Alternatives Is it good?
Notivo
Notivo is a private, per-person notebook for managers. Capture feedback, commitments, and 1:1 context as it happens — from web, iOS, WhatsApp, email, ChatGPT, or Claude — then get it back later, organized by person. sponsored
Note: These products don't have any matching categories. If you think this is a mistake, please edit the details of one of the products and suggest appropriate categories.

Which is more popular?

Based on our record, Materialize CSS should be more popular than Classic Shell. It has been mentioned 28 times since March 2021.

social mentions
28 vs 18
Design Tools popularity
100% vs 0%
alternatives listed
240+ vs 99

Base details

Website, pricing, platforms and company facts side by side.

Materialize CSS
Classic Shell
Website materializecss.com classicshell.net
Pricing
Open source
Open source
Listed in
CSS Framework Design Tools Developer Tools Development Tools +1
OS & Utilities Note Taking LMS Bookmarks +1

Features and specs

What each product offers, as listed by its team.

Materialize CSS 5 features
Classic Shell 5 features
  • Responsive Design
    Materialize CSS provides a responsive grid system, making it easier to create layouts that work well on various screen sizes and devices.
  • Material Design
    Adheres to Google's Material Design principles, offering a modern and professional look that is consistent across web applications.
  • Component Variety
    Offers a wide range of pre-built components, including forms, buttons, cards, and navigation bars, which helps speed up development.
  • Customization
    Provides options to customize components using Sass, making it flexible for specific design needs.
  • Built-in JavaScript
    Includes built-in JavaScript components like modals, carousels, and tabs, which enhance functionality without requiring additional libraries.

Possible disadvantages

  • Learning Curve
    Although it follows Material Design guidelines, there is a learning curve associated with understanding and implementing its various components and classes.
  • File Size
    Including the full library can make your project heavier, affecting load times, especially for users on slower connections.
  • Customization Complexity
    While customizable, deeply customizing or overriding default styles can sometimes be complicated and time-consuming.
  • Dependency on jQuery
    Some components still rely on jQuery, adding to the library size and potentially conflicting with modern JavaScript practices.
  • Community Support
    Compared to larger frameworks like Bootstrap, Materialize CSS has a smaller community, which can result in fewer third-party resources and plugins.
  • Customizable Start Menu
    Classic Shell allows users to customize the Start Menu to a significant extent, including changing the style and appearance to resemble earlier versions of Windows (XP, Vista, and 7).
  • Performance Enhancements
    The software is lightweight and generally does not consume significant system resources, making it a performance-efficient alternative to the default Start Menu.
  • Enhanced Usability
    It brings back certain features and functionalities that are familiar and preferred by users, enhancing overall user experience, particularly for those transitioning from older Windows versions.
  • Frequent Updates
    Classic Shell is regularly updated to ensure compatibility with new Windows updates, providing a reliable solution over time.
  • Free of Cost
    Classic Shell is available for free, making it an accessible option for anyone looking to improve their Start Menu without financial investment.

Possible disadvantages

  • Limited Official Support
    As Classic Shell is developed primarily by volunteers, official support may be limited compared to commercial software.
  • Complexity
    The extensive customization options might be overwhelming for less tech-savvy users, leading to a steeper learning curve.
  • Potential Compatibility Issues
    Although updated frequently, there can be temporary compatibility issues with the latest Windows updates, requiring users to wait for the next release.
  • Lack of Modern Features
    Classic Shell aims to replicate older versions of Windows Start Menus, which might lack some of the modern features available in the default Windows Start Menu.
  • Discontinued Development
    Official development of Classic Shell was discontinued in December 2017. While community forks like Open-Shell continue the project, the lack of official development could be seen as a disadvantage.

Analysis

An editorial look at what each product does well and who it suits.

Materialize CSS
Classic Shell

Overall verdict

  • Materialize CSS is a good choice if you're looking for a framework that emphasizes Material Design and comes with a sleek, modern interface. It's particularly useful for developers who want to quickly integrate Google's design philosophy without delving into custom styling or layout creation.

Why this product is good

  • Materialize CSS is a front-end framework based on Material Design principles developed by Google. It provides a comprehensive set of UI components that help developers create visually appealing and responsive web applications quickly. The framework includes a variety of pre-styled components like buttons, forms, cards, and much more, which adhere to the Material Design guidelines. This consistency in design components helps ensure a cohesive and professional look across web applications. Additionally, it simplifies responsive design with a grid system that's easy to implement, and it comes with excellent documentation and a supportive community.

Recommended for

    Materialize CSS is recommended for teams and developers who prefer Google's Material Design aesthetic, are building applications with a focus on rapid UI development, and value consistency and ease of use. It's also great for projects where a pre-existing UI library speeds up the development process, such as prototypes, admin dashboards, or smaller web applications. However, for highly customized UI components or non-Material Design projects, other frameworks might be more suitable.

Overall verdict

  • Overall, Classic Shell is considered a good tool for those who want to enhance their Windows experience with more customization and a nod to classic Windows aesthetics. It's reliable, widely used, and addresses some of the usability concerns people have with newer Windows versions.

Why this product is good

  • Classic Shell is popular among users who prefer the familiar interface and user experience of older versions of Windows, particularly Windows 7 or even XP. It offers customization options for the Start Menu, Explorer, and other UI elements, allowing a more personalized and comfortable experience for those who are not fond of newer Windows UI changes.

Recommended for

    Classic Shell is recommended for users who miss the classic Windows Start menu and layout, those who find the new Windows designs less intuitive, and individuals who want more control over their interface customization. It's particularly suitable for people transitioning from older Windows versions to newer ones who wish to maintain a certain level of familiarity.

Videos

Walkthroughs and reviews on video.

Materialize CSS 1 video + Add
Classic Shell 3 videos + Add

Build A Travel Agency Theme With Materialize CSS 1.0.0

Classic Shell with Windows 10!

More videos

  • Review - Classic Shell Review | Make Windows 8 Like Windows 7 with Classic Shell
  • Review - Classic Shell 4.0.2 Review

Category popularity

How often each product is chosen within a category, 0–100% relative to the other.

Score bands 0–20 21–40 41–50 51–60 61–100
Materialize CSS
Classic Shell
100% 100%
Design Tools
0% 0%
0% 0%
Note Taking
100% 100%
100% 100%
CSS Framework
0% 0%
0% 0%
LMS
100% 100%

User comments

Share your experience with using Materialize CSS and Classic Shell. For example, how are they different and which one is better?

Log in or Post with

Reviews and articles

External articles and on-site reviews we used to compare the two products.

Materialize CSS no reviews yet
Classic Shell no reviews yet

View more

We have no reviews of Classic Shell yet. Be the first one to post

Social recommendations and mentions

Recommendations tracked on public social media and blogs since March 2021.

Materialize CSS 28 mentions
Classic Shell 18 mentions
  • JavaScript Awesome Package
    Materialize - Responsive front-end framework based on Material Design. - Source: dev.to / 7 months ago
  • Mistakes Were Made
    Sure, why not use Blazor? It makes life easier for the developers who are primarily backend, to work on the frontend as well. Seems like the better choice. So what's next? The UI library. No shade to the long-time standing Bootstrap, but... - Source: dev.to / 11 months ago
  • Top 5 Best CSS Frameworks for Responsive Web Design in 2024
    Materialize is a modern CSS framework based on Google’s Material Design. It was created and designed by Google to provide a unified and consistent user interface across all its products. Materialize is focused on user experience as it... - Source: dev.to / almost 2 years ago

View more

View more

Alternatives to Materialize CSS and Classic Shell

When comparing Materialize CSS and Classic Shell, you can also consider the following products.

Loading...