42

I am using JSF 2.0 and I am looking for a copmponent library with minimal load in terms of performance. Which one is better to use if I have choice between RichFaces and PrimeFaces? What are the advantages and disadvantages of both?

The Student
  • 27,520
  • 68
  • 161
  • 264
Sanju
  • 3,187
  • 10
  • 41
  • 55
  • 1
    Try this http://www.primefaces.org/showcase/ui/dialog.jsf – Human Being Aug 21 '13 at 15:02
  • RichFaces is poorly designed, poorly engineered, poorly documented, and even more poorly managed as a product. And under very slow development. I've been using it for six years and I am about to drop it completely for PrimeFaces. – user207421 Jun 28 '15 at 01:13
  • Three part of difference between PrimeFaces vs RichFaces vs IceFaces in JSF: [Part 1](http://geekonjava.blogspot.com/2015/08/primefaces-vs-richfaces-vs-icefaces-in-jsf-part1.html), [Part 2](http://geekonjava.blogspot.com/2015/08/primefaces-vs-richfaces-vs-icefaces-in-jsf-part2.html) and [Part 3](http://geekonjava.blogspot.com/2015/08/primefaces-vs-richfaces-vs-icefaces-in-jsf-part3.html), – Tell Me How Sep 01 '15 at 09:25

10 Answers10

23

Currently Primefaces is the only component lib that I know of (for now) that has a complete JSF2 implementation. There are bugs and problems, and some components are to be rewritten, but development is lightning fast, the communication is excellent (I don't remember a single post on their support forum that hasn't been answered by Cagatay himself), and it is moving in the right direction (the new theming system is an example of that IMHO). I think Primefaces will be a mature JSF2 component lib by the end of the year.

There are some others, like Icefaces that I played with for a short time, but they are moving slowly and like I said, none of them are really JSF2 yet. Part of the reason for this is that Mojarra, the Sun reference implementation is quite buggy, and there some serious bugs that these component lib developers are waiting for to get fixed.

So my vote is definitely on Primefaces for now, we'll see how it will look like later.

egbokul
  • 3,944
  • 7
  • 36
  • 54
  • OpenFaces: from their homepage: OpenFaces 3.0 Early Access 1 dated 13 May 2010. I admit I did not evaluate it, so might be working well... but they still don't have an official release. Bugs: from the Icefaces blog: "During the ICEfaces 2.0 Alpha 2 development cycle the ICEfaces team had logged several important issues against Mojarra JSF 2.0.2 which were targeted to be fixed in the JSF 2.0.3 release." I remember one particular navigation bug which was a critical no-go for me... at least in Icefaces. – egbokul Aug 04 '10 at 12:06
  • @BalusC - do you recommend using OpenFaces? Have you tried it? So far I only tried IceFaces (which I didn't like), PrimeFaces and RichFaces – Dejell Aug 08 '10 at 04:59
19

Here is my comparison:

  • Richfaces is definitely more mature and possibly you may get developers who are experts in.
  • Primefaces has more components but lack combobox available in Richfaces. Richfaces does not have a bunch of common components like the "star rating" component, captcha component and password strength.
  • Primefaces is easier to skin since it is based on themeroller. It also has more themes than that is available in Richfaces.
  • Primefaces is tiny and can be implemented in the code easily - not too many dependencies.
  • Richfaces does not support JSF 2.0 till now (Nov 2010) - Primefaces has a stable release that supports JSF 2.0
  • Richfaces component growth is pretty much absent... No new components added in the last few years. The component library remains stale.

My recommendation:

  • Choose Primefaces if your application is client facing and need many AJAX components.
  • Choose Richfaces (or Primefaces) if it is an application that is used by your internal clients.

Hari Gangadharan

Hari Gangadharan
  • 649
  • 2
  • 6
  • 12
12

If you are evaluating PrimeFaces, following page would help:

https://www.primefaces.org/whyprimefaces/

Emil Sierżęga
  • 1,785
  • 2
  • 31
  • 38
Cagatay Civici
  • 6,406
  • 1
  • 29
  • 34
  • 8
    I tried Richfaces, IceFaces andTomahawk to start an intranet for Goodyear last year. No one of these libraries was as easy and as light as Primefaces to use. And I can say that documentation is good, and you can post your question on the forum, and Catagay answer himself. I'm one of his fans since then. – jomaora May 04 '11 at 14:17
6

Both are cool. Richfaces is more developed and tested generally, since primefaces came out later than RF. Just have a look at the component showcase and choose the one you prefer.

Or even better, you can use both together, there are no compatibility problems.

The advantages is that you have a lot of components ready to use out-of-the-box. The disadvantage is that sometimes you don't have full control about what a component can or can't do (but you can always create your own component extending a library component), and that you have to load some libraries into the client side for them to work (make sense, but it decreases performance)

pakore
  • 11,395
  • 12
  • 43
  • 62
4

Here are my two cents: Primefaces vs Icefaces vs RichFaces Hope it helps, Francesco

Francesco
  • 171
  • 1
  • 2
3

I have been using Primefaces since it seems more complete than the others. The thing about it is it is under very active development. The current development release is PrimeFaces 3.0 Milestone 3.

Version 2.2 is more stable, but it is painful to commit to it because you want the features that are appearing in version 3.

There are lots of bugs and undocumented quirks in the development releases. If you can cope with those then I would say go for PF 3. If you can't use PF 2.2 or something else.

Just one example: I have spent three days of my project trying to get one little composite component to work. It still doesn't work and I spent those three days fooling around rather than writing my application. You can post the the user form and maybe they will respond and maybe not. Unless you buy the support there is no way to escalate it, which is fair I guess but not very convenient when you can't afford it.

Another way of putting it is to look at their showcase. If what you want to do is there, it will work. For V3 that is the only documentation you are going to get. If you try to do anything the showcase doesn't specifically show, you are on your own.

AlanObject
  • 9,613
  • 19
  • 86
  • 142
  • 2
    User's Guide of 3.0 is ready as of 14.11.2011. http://blog.primefaces.org/?p=1527 – Cagatay Civici Nov 14 '11 at 21:35
  • Outstanding!. I'm buying a copy now. – AlanObject Nov 19 '11 at 03:45
  • How are you dealing with its license model? You only get main versions (3.0, 3.1, 4.0) for free, but maintenance releases (for example 4.0.1, 3.0.2) are not free? Was that a problem for you? How did you deal with bugs? – Amir Pashazadeh Dec 02 '13 at 05:32
  • @AmirPashazadeh Most bugs that you have to deal with are when you are pushing the edge of capabilities of PF. Problems are often dealt with here on stackoverflow with the primefaces tag. You develop work-arounds. If you are good at JavaScript and JQuery work-arounds are usually not difficult. I'm not good at that but I still find a way which isn't that often. – AlanObject Dec 02 '13 at 16:14
2

Primefaces are much more better than any other faces Read more

Web Design Mumbai
  • 21
  • 2
2

I have used both in the same project. So no need to drop either of them.

Bozho
  • 588,226
  • 146
  • 1,060
  • 1,140
  • yes, we do to. But consider this: When using the default theme or just using little stylesheet changes, you can see the difference between the rich- and prime faces components. So if you want them to have the same look and feel, add a few hours development time for sorting out the correct stylesheet changes. – roel Nov 07 '11 at 16:05
1

I've been using RichFaces during the last 3 years and Primefaces for a few months. I prefer Primefaces although it's still a big buggy.

RichFaces feels a bit dated and moving forward very slowly (if at all)

Manuel Palacio
  • 306
  • 3
  • 6
0

Benchmark considering Icefaces, RichFaces and PrimeFaces:

http://www.patternizando.com.br/2011/04/jsf-2-0-comparacao-de-desempenho-icefaces-primefaces-e-richfaces/

sbarbonjr
  • 1
  • 3
    [the same thing in english](http://nlabrot.blogspot.com/2011/01/jsf2-components-frameworks-datatable.html) – dertkw May 03 '11 at 15:50