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."
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."
But the list is a start...