Replace Aurelius?
KINDA · weekend projectThe core loop is buildable, but a dependable replacement becomes a real weekend or multi-day project. For Aurelius, organize interview notes, code excerpts, and synthesize themes into findings. The hard boundary is research-specific tagging, collaboration, reporting, and import workflows, plus participant network, synthesis workflow, and collaboration.
Build a personal replacement for Aurelius in an empty repository. Use Next.js 15, TypeScript, PostgreSQL, Drizzle ORM, and Resend; do not offer alternative stacks. The core loop is: organize interview notes, code excerpts, merge duplicates, connect evidence to themes, and publish a transparent view of synthesized research findings. Make the first run work locally with one documented command. Store all user data locally by default and make export straightforward. Put secrets in .env, ship .env.example, and never commit credentials. Create public and private feedback intake with consent text and optional contact details. Support posts, votes, comments, tags, statuses, owners, and duplicate merging. Add a research note type with evidence links, quotes, themes, and confidence. Build search and filters across feedback, customers, segments, themes, and status. Provide email notifications, moderation, export, deletion, and an audit log. Publish a read-only roadmap or findings page using only explicitly public items. Include clear empty, loading, success, and recoverable error states. Add input validation, safe filenames, and graceful handling of unavailable APIs. Write focused tests for the core transformation and one end-to-end happy path. Create a README with setup, architecture, permissions, data location, and backup steps. Do not add accounts, billing, telemetry, analytics, or a hosted control plane. Deliberately leave out a paid research-participant marketplace. Deliberately leave out unlimited video storage and automated transcription. Deliberately leave out enterprise repositories, SSO, and governance. Finish by running the tests and listing the exact commands used.
$ open in your agent (prompt prefilled, you press enter) or copy it raw · this prompt is generated from the build plan · improve it via PR
People still pay for Aurelius because people pay either for access to participants or for a research repository that keeps evidence usable across an organization. The recurring cost buys recruitment, consent, scheduling, media storage, transcription, tagging consistency, notifications, search, and retention, not just the visible interface.
xresearch-specific tagging, collaboration, reporting, and import workflows
xlarge participant panel
xrecording and transcription infrastructure
xadvanced research repository
xenterprise governance
What does the Aurelius verdict mean?
The core job looks buildable, with meaningful gaps: research-specific tagging, collaboration, reporting, and import workflows, large participant panel. Read the full tradeoff list before committing. This research record is not a hosted IVCIFY tool.
What price does this directory record show for Aurelius?
The directory records $49/month for Pro, checked 2026-07-31. Verify the source before making a purchase decision. This reference stays outside retail Stack Math unless current matched evidence supports the comparison.
What do I lose by replacing Aurelius?
Honestly: research-specific tagging, collaboration, reporting, and import workflows; large participant panel; recording and transcription infrastructure; advanced research repository; enterprise governance. If any of those are load-bearing for you, keep paying.
Is there an open-source alternative to Aurelius?
The listed prior art includes Fider (Open-source customer-feedback portal with voting and status workflows.). Inspect those projects before starting from a blank prompt.