Pros of ant-design

• Larger community and more contributors, leading to faster development and issue resolution
• More comprehensive documentation and examples
• Supports React Native, enabling mobile app development

Cons of ant-design

• Steeper learning curve due to more complex API and extensive features
• Larger bundle size, which may impact initial load times
• Less flexibility for customization compared to ng-zorro-antd

Code Comparison

ng-zorro-antd (Angular):

import { NzButtonModule } from 'ng-zorro-antd/button';

@NgModule({
  imports: [NzButtonModule],
})
export class AppModule { }

ant-design (React):

import { Button } from 'antd';

function App() {
  return <Button type="primary">Click me</Button>;
}

Both libraries offer similar components and functionality, but ng-zorro-antd is specifically designed for Angular applications, while ant-design is primarily for React. The code structure differs due to the frameworks they support, with ng-zorro-antd using Angular's module system and ant-design utilizing React's component-based approach.

Pros of PrimeNG

• More extensive component library with a wider range of UI elements
• Better documentation and examples for each component
• Stronger community support and more frequent updates

Cons of PrimeNG

• Larger bundle size due to the extensive component library
• Steeper learning curve for beginners due to the number of options and configurations
• Less consistent with Material Design principles compared to ng-zorro-antd

Code Comparison

PrimeNG Button:

<p-button label="Click me" icon="pi pi-check" iconPos="right"></p-button>

ng-zorro-antd Button:

<button nz-button nzType="primary" nzShape="round">
  <i nz-icon nzType="search"></i>Search
</button>

Both libraries offer similar functionality, but PrimeNG tends to use more attributes for configuration, while ng-zorro-antd relies on directives and nested elements. PrimeNG's approach may be more intuitive for some developers, while ng-zorro-antd's structure aligns more closely with Angular's component-based architecture.

Pros of Angular Components

• Official Angular Material library with extensive documentation and community support
• Seamless integration with Angular framework and ecosystem
• Consistent design language following Material Design principles

Cons of Angular Components

• Limited set of components compared to ng-zorro-antd
• Less customization options for theming and styling
• Steeper learning curve for developers new to Material Design

Code Comparison

Angular Components:

import { MatButtonModule } from '@angular/material/button';

@NgModule({
  imports: [MatButtonModule],
})
export class AppModule { }

ng-zorro-antd:

import { NzButtonModule } from 'ng-zorro-antd/button';

@NgModule({
  imports: [NzButtonModule],
})
export class AppModule { }

Both libraries offer modular imports, but ng-zorro-antd provides more granular control over component imports. Angular Components follows Material Design guidelines, while ng-zorro-antd is based on Ant Design, offering a different visual style and component set.

ng-zorro-antd provides a wider range of components and more extensive customization options, making it suitable for complex enterprise applications. However, Angular Components benefits from being the official Material Design implementation for Angular, ensuring better long-term support and compatibility with the framework.

Pros of Clarity

• More comprehensive design system with extensive documentation
• Better accessibility features and compliance with WCAG guidelines
• Stronger focus on enterprise-level applications and scalability

Cons of Clarity

• Steeper learning curve due to its more complex architecture
• Less frequent updates and potentially slower adoption of new features
• Smaller community compared to ng-zorro-antd, which may result in fewer third-party resources

Code Comparison

Clarity Button:

<button class="btn btn-primary">Primary Button</button>

ng-zorro-antd Button:

<button nz-button nzType="primary">Primary Button</button>

Both libraries offer similar functionality, but Clarity uses CSS classes for styling, while ng-zorro-antd uses Angular directives. This difference in approach is consistent throughout the libraries, with Clarity relying more on traditional HTML and CSS patterns, and ng-zorro-antd leveraging Angular's capabilities for a more tightly integrated experience.

Overall, Clarity is better suited for large-scale enterprise applications with strict accessibility requirements, while ng-zorro-antd offers a more lightweight and flexible solution for a wider range of projects. The choice between the two depends on the specific needs of your project and team preferences.

Pros of Nebular

• More customizable and flexible UI components
• Includes additional features like authentication and security modules
• Better suited for complex, enterprise-level applications

Cons of Nebular

• Smaller community and less frequent updates compared to ng-zorro-antd
• Steeper learning curve for developers new to the framework
• Fewer pre-built components available out of the box

Code Comparison

ng-zorro-antd:

import { NzButtonModule } from 'ng-zorro-antd/button';

@NgModule({
  imports: [ NzButtonModule ]
})
export class AppModule { }

Nebular:

import { NbButtonModule } from '@nebular/theme';

@NgModule({
  imports: [ NbButtonModule ]
})
export class AppModule { }

Both libraries offer similar component usage, but Nebular's components are prefixed with 'Nb' instead of 'Nz'. The main difference lies in the overall structure and additional features provided by each library, rather than in the basic component implementation.

Pros of ngx-bootstrap

• Lighter weight and more focused on core Bootstrap components
• Easier integration with existing Bootstrap-based projects
• More frequent updates and active community support

Cons of ngx-bootstrap

• Limited set of components compared to ng-zorro-antd
• Less comprehensive documentation and examples
• Lacks some advanced features and customization options

Code Comparison

ngx-bootstrap:

<button type="button" class="btn btn-primary" 
        tooltip="Vivamus sagittis lacus vel augue laoreet rutrum faucibus.">
  Simple demo
</button>

ng-zorro-antd:

<button nz-button nzType="primary" nz-tooltip 
        nzTooltipTitle="Vivamus sagittis lacus vel augue laoreet rutrum faucibus.">
  Simple demo
</button>

Both libraries offer similar functionality, but ng-zorro-antd uses custom attributes (nz-*) for configuration, while ngx-bootstrap relies more on standard Bootstrap classes and attributes.

ngx-bootstrap is a good choice for projects already using Bootstrap or requiring a lightweight solution. ng-zorro-antd offers a more comprehensive set of components and advanced features, making it suitable for larger, more complex applications that need a complete UI framework.