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.
"The feature that allows a variation of work space based on the application being used."
"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."
"This is a pretty light solution. It's not too heavy."
"Spring Boot's most valuable functionalities include inversion of control, dependency injection, and the ability to gather all services, models, and controllers together for easy connectivity to your REST API, as well as the ability to build a modular response and request system. It seamlessly integrates with various backends, such as SQL, events, and messaging systems, making it a user-friendly and efficient Java tool. Additionally, it functions as a reliable business transaction layer, providing excellent support for front-end and back-end visual tools."
"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 setup is straightforward."
"I have found the starter solutions valuable, as well as integration with other products."
"The API gateway and cloud configuration allows us to configure the properties outside of the service with respect to enrollment."
"This is a stable solution that is being used in the HR space."
"The simplicity is excellent."
"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."
"It would be great if we could have a UI-based approach or easily include the specific dependencies we need."
"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."
"The solution has some vulnerabilities and fails our security audits, forcing us to keep fixing the solution."
"communicationbetween different services from the third party layers or with the legacy applications needs to improve."
"When the dependencies within those starter packages clash, mismatch or have a hazard, it is hard to solve the issue."
"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 product could be improved by supporting and integrating Hadoop."
"This is a really good solution for me and I can't think of anything that can be improved."
"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."
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, Apache Spark and Vert.x, whereas Spring Boot is most compared with Apache Spark, Open Liberty, 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.
