We performed a comparison between JBoss and Tomcat based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Server solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."JBoss is a scalable tool."
"The greatest benefit of JBoss is that it was procured by IBM, thereby offering exceptional support for our banking operations."
"We use JBoss mainly for application deployments and application servers."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy."
"The most valuable thing about JBoss is how easy it is to install and manage it on-premise, making the process simple."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"There's good documentation and a pretty good community surrounding the product."
"The solution is scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Tomcat is its ability to export libraries into different instances so that I can use it not only in one application but in multiple applications."
"I would rate the pricing a ten out of ten, where one is high price and ten is low price. The pricing is pretty low."
"Web apps are very easy to deploy."
"The deployment process is very fast."
"We can use Apache Tomcat for Java server applications."
"Tomcat is user-friendly and easy to set up, especially compared to WebLogic or JBoss where some specialty is required. If you are going for Tomcat, you can use their guidelines and can set it up easily."
"The solution has very robust functionality."
"The stability of the solution could improve with Microsoft Windows."
"It can have automation features. Everybody is focused right now on automation. In terms of saving cost, automation is always the first thing that comes to light."
"JBoss is not as reliable and stable as WebLogic."
"Logging-related issues in JBoss require improvement."
"The documentation could be better. When we have questions, we need to check multiple websites. There isn't one place listing a set of common problems and how to fix them."
"There is not much ability inside of the solution. The world is going beyond different micro and data-type things like Microsoft Office, so we are not seeing much ability within the solution."
"The product could be cheaper."
"The solution's documentation could be better."
"I would personally like it if the admin console would show more information specifically about memory being used."
"Performance optimization is an area of concern in Tomcat that should be made better."
"Tomcat needs to improve its stability."
"Java functions should be built better into the solution."
"Technical support is limited."
"Security integration in Tomcat is complicated. We need to use another tool to solve the security issues."
"In the solution, we are using the terminal to enter command line codes for operations and management, this is difficult for me. It would be better if we had some administrator UI tools for this."
"Tomcat could be a little bit more innovative. Tomcat could come up with a framework that's more lightweight and purely targeted at Java applications."
JBoss is ranked 3rd in Application Server with 24 reviews while Tomcat is ranked 2nd in Application Server with 45 reviews. JBoss is rated 8.4, while Tomcat is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of JBoss writes "A flexible and stable solution that is cost-efficient compared to other products". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tomcat writes "A lightweight tool that offers efficiency in terms of memory and resource usage". JBoss is most compared with Oracle WebLogic Server, IBM WebSphere Application Server, IIS, Oracle GlassFish and TmaxSoft JEUS, whereas Tomcat is most compared with Oracle WebLogic Server, IBM WebSphere Application Server, IIS, Caucho Resin and TmaxSoft JEUS. See our JBoss vs. Tomcat report.
See our list of best Application Server vendors.
We monitor all Application Server 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.