I am hesitant to build software that already exists because it seems sort of pointless in the grand scheme of the universe. And it seems like a tough spot to compete only on price. But it does seem like a pretty safe bet for making some income and the scope of the project is feasible for a single developer over some months.
Any advice or opinions appreciated.
It's unlikely what you build will be identical unless you intend to make an exact copy. You really should target a niche that is being ignored and have something that differentiates your software from existing competitors.
That said, I don't think competing on cost as your only difference is a good idea at all. If your software is solving a real business problem that brings in big income, why would a business care about saving a (relatively) small amount of money? If you become popular, could the big player wipe you out by offering a cheaper price tier? Is price going to be enough to make businesses take a risk of moving away from the established player? Will your low cost make paid advertising infeasible?
Also, don't underestimate the difference in the time it takes to build a quick prototype that mostly works, and building something robust + user friendly that people will be willing to pay money for.
It was an absolute junk by this dev's own assessment. Slow, bloated, buggy. Development was disorganized and perpetually behind the schedule. It was also really expensive, but it endured because the industry is really conservative (they like their crappy tools regardless) and the vendor lock-in is a major factor. Lots of hidden complexity too, including the nuances of business flow.
Don't know what niche you have in mind, but do talk to the target clients before making a decision. You may discover that they don't really see a problem where you see one, nor that they are excited to see it fixed and pay you for that privilege.
After taking a deeper look at existing services we noted they were all surprisingly expensive - and in the same bracket.
Turned out access to a particular API and ensuring the process and output of the service would be legally inadmissible were the real cost, and we actually wouldn’t be able to compete with the existing services.
Not saying don’t go for it, just make sure you understand that the cost may not be the problem on the surface.
It's probably easier to do higher quality replicas of niche software as a lot of them are poorly done.
One is appdupe.com there are a couple of others.
Basically they take X-like-Y business ideas that demonstrated, nominally, their worth (in either solving a business problem, or attracting investors).
And they just duplicate those models -- uber-like, tinder-like, etsy/ebay-like, and so on.
They generate the source for apps, backend services, etc --- you just give them your twitter handle, name, logo, contact, fb page... whatever.
I also read when researching this, that some of them produce 50 apps per week.
Apparently, again 3rd hand info, that their services start at 10K usd and go up from there....
I have no idea about the quality, may be bad and may be they they will end up charging 10 times more what you though initially...
So imaging that people are not shy of duplicating a business idea and just applying perhaps to something else, or just a different geographical region....
It is definitely not pointless building software that already exists.
I would say go for it...
Either of 3 things will happen
a) you are successful and completion fails
b) they are successful and you fail
c) you are both successful
in all 3 scenarios -- end users seem to be benefit.
When Google was introduced, the search engine market was packed.