We compared Spring Boot and Eclipse MicroProfile based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Spring Boot is praised for its simplicity, flexibility, and efficiency in developing Java-based applications, with particular emphasis on customer service and cost-effectiveness. On the other hand, Eclipse MicroProfile is commended for its lightweight architecture, ease of integration, and strong support, with users highlighting its positive ROI and the need for improved documentation and compatibility.
Features: Spring Boot is lauded for its simplicity, ease of use, and rapid application development capabilities. Its streamlined configuration process and extensive integration options make it highly flexible. On the other hand, Eclipse MicroProfile is praised for its lightweight and flexible architecture, seamless integration with other frameworks and platforms, and extensive support and documentation.
Pricing and ROI: Spring Boot has been praised for its cost-effectiveness and reasonable pricing options, while Eclipse MicroProfile is acclaimed for its minimal setup cost and flexible licensing model. Customers appreciate the ease of implementation with Spring Boot, while users of Eclipse MicroProfile find it suitable for various usage scenarios., Spring Boot product has been praised for increased efficiency, reduced development time, improved performance, and enhanced productivity. Users appreciate the ease of use, versatility, and availability of numerous libraries. On the other hand, Eclipse MicroProfile has shown positive ROI with improved efficiency, enhanced productivity, and cost savings.
Room for Improvement: Spring Boot could benefit from enhancements in performance, documentation, and ease of use. It also needs improvements in error handling, compatibility with frameworks, resource management, and integration with external components. On the other hand, Eclipse MicroProfile needs better documentation, clearer examples and tutorials, more frequent updates, addressing compatibility issues, improving performance, and better integration with existing tools.
Deployment and customer support: The user reviews for Spring Boot and Eclipse MicroProfile show that the duration required to establish a new tech solution can vary. While some users mentioned spending three months on deployment and an additional week on setup for both products, there are also users who completed deployment and setup within the same week., The customer service for Spring Boot is highly praised for its responsiveness and helpfulness. Users find the support team efficient, knowledgeable, and attentive to their needs. On the other hand, Eclipse MicroProfile's customer service is highly regarded for its prompt assistance, efficient problem-solving, and understanding of user needs. The support team's excellent response time indicates a strong commitment to customer satisfaction.
The summary above is based on 33 interviews we conducted recently with Spring Boot and Eclipse MicroProfile users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The solution is stable."
"Provides a lightweight runtime."
"We use the solution to create microservices."
"Spring Boot's main feature is that it's great for DevOps because you can write your own application. You don't need to install Apache Tomcat. You can create your project easily with a few clicks."
"The most valuable feature of Spring Boot is it reduces the configuration needed. The configuration is handled by the solution. For example, if you're going to develop a web service, we needed to have a Tomcat web server and had to deploy the services and do tests. However, with Spring Boot, the default server comes with Spring Boot which reduces the task of doing all the configuration."
"This is a stable solution that is being used in the HR space."
"We like that the product is open-source."
"Spring Boot facilitates the use of Java which is open source. We use Github and other libraries that are available which assist in the building we need to do."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...The initial setup was not complex and was a simple process."
"The API gateway and cloud configuration allows us to configure the properties outside of the service with respect to enrollment."
"We like that it is an open-source tool."
"Its performance speed could be improved while working on the browser."
"The tool needs to improve its messaging."
"Deployment of microservers in the Kubernetes environment is difficult."
"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."
"It needs more applicable control for large-scale application development."
"When the dependencies within those starter packages clash, mismatch or have a hazard, it is hard to solve the issue."
"It's difficult to explain to junior developers what it does under the hood."
"They should include tutorial videos for learning new features."
"This solution could be improved if it offered greater integration and was more compatible with other solutions."
"I would like to see more integration in this solution."
"The product could be improved by supporting and integrating Hadoop."
Eclipse MicroProfile is ranked 6th in Java Frameworks with 3 reviews while Spring Boot is ranked 1st in Java Frameworks with 38 reviews. Eclipse MicroProfile is rated 8.4, while Spring Boot is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Eclipse MicroProfile writes "Scalable solution with an easy initial setup process". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Spring Boot writes "It's highly scalable, secure, and provides all the enhanced tools I need. ". Eclipse MicroProfile is most compared with Jakarta EE, Amazon Corretto, Vert.x and Open Liberty, whereas Spring Boot is most compared with Jakarta EE, Open Liberty, Apache Spark, Vert.x and Oracle Application Development Framework. See our Eclipse MicroProfile 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.