We compared Spring Boot and Jakarta EE across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Ease of Deployment: Spring Boot has a simple and uncomplicated setup process that can be completed quickly. Jakarta EE's initial setup is more difficult, especially when configuring it with Windows.
Features: Spring Boot is highly regarded for its lightweight framework, customization options, and strong community support. Jakarta EE earned high marks for its REST services, configuration capabilities, and ability to work well in cloud environments.
Room for Improvement: Spring could improve its load-balancing, documentation, and cross-framework compatibility. On the other hand, Jakarta EE could enhance developer usability by simplifying configuration.
Pricing: Spring Boot is a cost-effective option with no setup fees, while Jakarta EE has a moderate pricing rating.
ROI: Boot is praised for its ability to enhance customer satisfaction, boost productivity, and decrease development time. Jakarta EE is valued for its cost savings, standardization, and future-proofing capabilities.
Service and Support: Spring Boot's customer service and support receive high praise due to their large international community and quick feedback. Users rarely have to reach out for support because they can easily find answers online. Jakarta EE's customer service could be enhanced, especially in terms of making documentation more accessible.
Comparison Results: Spring Boot is highly regarded for its user-friendly setup, lightweight framework, extensive features, and strong backing from the community. However, it could improve integration, documentation, and performance. Jakarta EE excels in REST services, configuration capabilities, and compatibility with cloud environments. Its customer service leaves something to be desired.
"Configuring, monitoring, and ensuring observability is a straightforward process."
"Jakarta EE's best features include REST services, configuration, and persistent facilities. It's also incredibly cloud friendly."
"The feature that allows a variation of work space based on the application being used."
"Spring Boot's configuration is easy, and it has an out-of-the-box deployment."
"The most valuable features of Spring Boot include being able to check all the logs and doing health checks for applications. We can also do monitoring more quickly, and use Spring Boot for production support, so when production goes up or down, we can bring up the application very quickly through Spring Boot."
"Spring Boot provides an all-in-one solution for the libraries needed to create a Win app. It covers all the aspects, including validation, security, etc. It provides all those features out-of-the-box. You can do almost everything with Spring Boot."
"The community surrounding Spring Boot is really good. If you face any issue with Spring Boot, you will get the answer from the community."
"Features that help with monitoring and tracking network calls between several micro services."
"The most valuable feature of Spring Boot is all the interactions to various applications happen using Spring Boot."
"The platform is easy for developers to download."
"The solution's framework is stable."
"All the customization and plugins can make the interface too slow and heavy in some situations."
"It would be great if we could have a UI-based approach or easily include the specific dependencies we need."
"Jakarta EE's configuration could be simpler, which would make it more useful as a developer experience."
"The tool's documentation could be improved, especially by tying it back to frequently asked questions and issues users have. A feedback loop in which the documentation targets the most commonly asked user questions would make using the solution easier. Essentially, I want a more user-centered approach to documentation rather than a purely technical focus."
"If you want to create large microservices applications, you need to connect several applications and services to each other. It is very complicated, and Spring Boot does not have an integrated solution for it."
"The cloud packaging is not very straightforward."
"The services we develop are purely synchronous services, so there's a blocking and waiting state. This is a big problem in microservices."
"If you want to have multiple integrations, the setup phase will become complex."
"They should integrate the solution with more AI and machine learning platforms."
"The security could be simplified."
"The cross framework compatibility has some shortcomings. With JUnit Test Runner and Spring Boot, it's really tedious to make them both work to write the test cases."
Jakarta EE is ranked 4th in Java Frameworks with 3 reviews while Spring Boot is ranked 1st in Java Frameworks with 38 reviews. Jakarta EE is rated 7.4, while Spring Boot is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Jakarta EE writes "A robust enterprise Java capabilities with complex configuration involved, making it a powerful choice for scalable applications while requiring a learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Spring Boot writes "It's highly scalable, secure, and provides all the enhanced tools I need. ". Jakarta EE is most compared with Spring MVC, Amazon Corretto, Eclipse MicroProfile, Vert.x and Apache Spark, whereas Spring Boot is most compared with Open Liberty, Apache Spark, Eclipse MicroProfile, Vert.x and Oracle Application Development Framework. See our Jakarta EE vs. Spring Boot report.
See our list of best Java Frameworks vendors.
We monitor all Java Frameworks reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.