Difference between Spring and Spring Boot

Aspect	Spring Framework	Spring Boot
Configuration	Requires manual configuration with XML or annotations	Offers auto-configuration based on dependencies
Project Setup	Developers need to manually configure the project	Pre-configured project templates and starter packs (e.g., spring-boot-starter)
Dependency Management	Requires manual management of dependencies and libraries	Provides starter dependencies that bundle commonly used libraries
Server Setup	Requires an external server (e.g., Tomcat) for deployment	Comes with embedded servers (Tomcat, Jetty) for standalone applications
Deployment	Packaged as a WAR file and deployed to an external server	Packaged as a JAR file with embedded server, runs independently
Microservices Support	Can be used for microservices but requires more configuration	Designed for microservices architecture with minimal setup
Production-Ready Features	Lacks built-in monitoring or health-check features	Comes with Spring Boot Actuator for monitoring, health checks, and metrics
Learning Curve	Steeper learning curve due to manual configurations	Easier to learn and use due to convention-over-configuration approach
Externalized Configuration	Requires manual setup for external configurations (properties, YAML)	Built-in support for external configurations via properties or YAML
Startup Time	Slower due to manual configuration and setup	Faster due to auto-configuration and embedded server setup
Use Case	Suitable for large enterprise applications requiring full control	Best for rapid development, microservices, REST APIs, and standalone applications

Explanation:

1. Configuration:
   In Spring, developers manually configure the application using XML files or annotations, which can be time-consuming and complex. Spring Boot simplifies this process by providing auto-configuration, which automatically configures the application based on the included dependencies, reducing the need for manual setup.
2. Project Setup:
   With Spring, developers must set up the project structure manually and configure the dependencies. Spring Boot offers starter templates called starters (e.g., spring-boot-starter-web, spring-boot-starter-data-jpa), which include the necessary libraries and dependencies for common use cases, making project setup faster.
3. Dependency Management:
   Spring requires developers to specify and manage individual dependencies in the build tool (e.g., Maven, Gradle). Spring Boot uses starter dependencies that bundle commonly needed libraries for various tasks, simplifying dependency management.
4. Server Setup:
   In Spring, developers must configure and deploy the application on an external server like Tomcat or Jetty. Spring Boot comes with embedded servers, so you can package and run the application as a standalone JAR without needing an external server.
5. Deployment:
   Spring applications are typically deployed as WAR files on a server. Spring Boot allows you to package the application as a JAR file with an embedded server, making deployment easier, especially in microservices architectures.
6. Microservices Support:
   While Spring can be used for building microservices, it requires more configuration. Spring Boot, on the other hand, is designed with microservices in mind, providing out-of-the-box support for lightweight, independent services.
7. Production-Ready Features:
   Spring does not include built-in tools for monitoring and health checks. Spring Boot includes the Spring Boot Actuator, which provides endpoints for monitoring application health, gathering metrics, and performing diagnostics.
8. Learning Curve:
   Spring has a steeper learning curve because it requires manual configuration and a deeper understanding of the framework. Spring Boot is easier to learn due to its opinionated defaults, which reduce complexity and allow developers to focus on building functionality.
9. Externalized Configuration:
   Spring requires manual setup for external configuration through properties or YAML files. Spring Boot has built-in support for externalized configuration, allowing developers to easily manage environment-specific properties.
10. Startup Time:
    Spring applications typically have longer startup times due to the manual configuration and setup required. Spring Boot applications have faster startup times due to auto-configuration and embedded servers.
11. Use Case:
    Spring is more suitable for complex, large-scale enterprise applications where full control over configuration is required. Spring Boot is ideal for rapid development of microservices, REST APIs, and standalone applications that need to be deployed quickly.

---

In Summary:

• Spring Framework is great for developers who need full control over every aspect of their application, but it requires more effort and setup.
• Spring Boot is perfect for developers who want to quickly start building applications with minimal configuration, especially for microservices and web applications. It’s designed to make Spring easier and more accessible.