I also had a similar idea when I built tech-diff (https://tech-diff.com/) but rather than being just a catalog of items, it shows what the feature differences are. This is what I would argue is more important when investigating alternatives.
But, this comes at the cost of the data being harder to obtain as it is usually deep within documentation or code. Maybe we can reach a feature specification of technologies sometime in the future.
The problem with comparing two software programs is that it's less "feature check list" and more "everything subjective".
For example, say you compare a Ferrari to a Toyota. They overlap in pretty much all features. (Steering wheel, gets you from A to B, and so on.) But of course you don't choose between a ferrari and a Toyota based on a feature list.
So "here a list of cars for those who can't afford a ferrari" would be somewhat useless.
Its easy to compare say Windows to Linux from a featurelist point if view. It's much harder to quantify the non tangibles.
So sure, a list that says "x for those using y" is a useful starting point. But it's very much the tip of the iceberg. Expect to do a LOT of research, and a lot of time experimenting before you can determine if "x can replace y for my situation."
I fully second this sentiment, but seems more like a dream... And to make the matters far more difficult, there are updates that add new features! Also, some apps claim to do something but only provide a half-working solution. Ultimately, sometimes it all boils down to install (ideally, using distrobox) and try yourself some of the top candidates. And repeat with some frequency that correlate to how important such software piece is to you...
But, this comes at the cost of the data being harder to obtain as it is usually deep within documentation or code. Maybe we can reach a feature specification of technologies sometime in the future.