Geek Answers Handbook

JBoss RichFaces vs IceFaces vs Apache Trinidad - JSF component library comparison

What do you think / use for the interface? The backing level will be Spring 3. Criteria:

  • Your personal opinion
  • Components
  • Documentation
  • AJAX Integration
  • Browser support
  • Community
  • Tool Support (Eclipse, NetBeans)

I found several topics to compare, but that was about versions in 2007 and older versions.

+6
jsf richfaces icefaces trinidad
source share
4 answers

I would prefer RichFaces. But keep in mind that you can use them all at once if you need a specific component.

I did not use the other two, but I studied them in detail to select.

  • components - richfaces only have more components than others. And in my non-designer opinion, the components of trinidad are a little ugly :)
  • documentation - all is well
  • ajax integration - richfaces has the pretty powerful ajax features that underlie those that are implemented in JSF 2.0
  • browser compatibility - all of them have minor problems, and do not allow this to be avoided.
  • community - you will find answers to most of your questions in your forums or here.
  • tools - you don’t need this, but the general JSF tool is suitable for everyone.

However, you can also take a look at Primefaces - it has really good components. And to emphasize this - all component libraries can be used together.

+9
source share

I only worked with Trinidad and Richfaces. I like both, but I would give an advantage to Trinidad. Perhaps because I worked with him more, and I feel more comfortable with him. Trinidad's online documentation is also pretty good.

Both Trinidad and RF have a component library. You can check these links to find out which components you find useful for your application. I used the Trinidad tree in one recent application that I developed, and it was easy to use and populate: Trinidad Components - RichFaces Components (Login required)

Regarding skinning, I think the default Trinidad skin is by default simpler than RichFaces, but I think that both have ways to make them look as beautiful as your CSS skills allow.

I think RichFaces has a more mature AJAX integration, and their AJAX components and events are more convenient for me than Trinidad ones.

+3
source share

I would prefer Rich Faces. I use Ice Faces in my current project, but it's hard to get community support due to the small community. In this case, rich faces are good.

0
source share

I used richfaces in one of my projects, and in the current project I use icefaces. I believe RichFaces will be a better option due to the following reasons:

  • This is a mature structure compared to Icefaces. Icefaces have a lot of mistakes.
  • Richfaces has a stronger community than Icefaces
0
source share

More articles:


All Articles