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."
"The feature that allows a variation of work space based on the application being used."
"Jakarta EE's best features include REST services, configuration, and persistent facilities. It's also incredibly cloud friendly."
"It's great because it simplifies development. Together with MyBatis they make a beautiful pair for Java development."
"Features that help with monitoring and tracking network calls between several micro services."
"We like that it is an open-source tool."
"The Spring Cloud Gateway, Load Balancer are the valuable features. Apart from them, handling a sync call, then multiple service communication through field clients are also useful features."
"It is a very scalable solution."
"We like that the product is open-source."
"This is a stable solution that is being used in the HR space."
"The setup is straightforward."
"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."
"All the customization and plugins can make the interface too slow and heavy in some situations."
"communicationbetween different services from the third party layers or with the legacy applications needs to improve."
"This solution could be improved if there were more libraries available. We would also like more mobile platform functionality using low levels of code."
"The solution could improve its flexibility."
"This is a really good solution for me and I can't think of anything that can be improved."
"It's difficult to explain to junior developers what it does under the hood."
"We'd like to have fewer updates."
"Spring Boot is okay right now, but my team is looking for some integration where you can make a call to the JMS messaging service and other types of third-party integrations. If the integration with Spring Boot is improved, that would make the tool better. What I'd like to see in the next release of Spring Boot is its integration or tie-up with messaging servers and third-party EFPs, as that would make it very good and more competitive versus other new solutions in the market."
"We'd like them to develop more supporting testing."
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.