UBIKON.ioLIFECYCLE
App Modernization & Codebase Takeover
Typical engagement: $8k–$80k · 3–16 weeks
What this is
Ubikon modernizes existing products that have become slow, fragile or stuck on a dead stack — a codebase audit first, then incremental slices that replace the system while it stays live, not a big-bang rewrite by default. Engagements run $8k–$80k across 3–16 weeks, quoted line-item after the audit. When the audit finds the code is fine, or that a rewrite genuinely is cheaper, we say so before taking modernization money.
What you get
Concrete deliverables, not a vague promise.
- —A written audit report scored against our published engineering standards, risks ranked — delivered even when the verdict is that the code is fine
- —An architecture decision record: every significant choice written down with its reasoning at the time, so the next team inherits context, not archaeology
- —Incremental slices: each new module ships beside the old one behind a stable interface, with a rollback path per slice
- —Strict typing, tests and CI added to every code path we touch — lint, typecheck and tests running on every merge
- —Full IP transfer including work delivered mid-engagement — stop after any slice and keep everything shipped so far
How we build it
Stack and architecture for a typical build.
Your existing stack stays wherever it is sound — modernization is not an excuse to rebadge everything onto our defaults. Where a slice genuinely needs replacing, it moves to the mainstream stack we run our own products on — Flutter, Next.js, FastAPI, PostgreSQL or MongoDB — with no proprietary runtime, so the modernized system never depends on us.
Pricing
Where the number comes from.
The $8k–$80k range above is priced from real delivery data across 300+ completed projects — not a day rate multiplied by a guess. A full itemized breakdown by phase is available on a scoping call, or get a rough one now from the calculator below.
Open the cost calculator →The honest comparison
Incremental strangler-fig modernization vs a big-bang rewrite
Both are legitimate engineering decisions. The audit decides which one is honest for your codebase — here is the actual trade.
| Incremental (strangler fig, Ubikon default) | Big-bang rewrite | |
|---|---|---|
| Risk to live users | Low — one slice in motion at a time, each with a rollback path | High — everything changes at once, cutover day is all-or-nothing |
| Time to first shipped improvement | Weeks — the first slice ships while the rest stays untouched | Months — nothing ships until the whole replacement works |
| Cost profile | Spread across milestones — each slice is independently stoppable | Committed up front — sunk cost if abandoned midway |
| What you keep if you stop early | Every finished slice, still working in production | An unfinished replacement nobody can ship |
| When it is the honest choice | A live product with real users that cannot afford downtime | A dead stack, a small codebase, or few users to disrupt |
Process
3–16 weeks, start to launch.
Codebase audit first
Before any quote: what the code actually contains, measured against our published standards — typing, tests, security, docs, deployability.
Honest verdict
Three possible answers: modernize incrementally, rewrite because it genuinely is cheaper, or the code is fine and the problem is elsewhere. You get the real one.
Line-item quote
Slices priced individually within the fixed-scope band, ordered by risk retired per dollar — you can stop after any slice.
Weekly slices, product live
Each new module ships beside the old behind a stable interface. A working build, a video walkthrough and a written changelog every week.
Straight answers
What buyers ask about this service
Can you take over an app another team built? +
Yes — inherited codebases are the normal starting point for this service, not the exception. We audit first against our published standards so both sides know exactly what is being inherited, then quote line-item from what the audit found, not from the previous team's claims. One honest exclusion: if the driver is regulated-industry compliance — HIPAA-grade clinical work, certified audit trails — a specialist firm will serve you better, and we say so on the call.
Should we rewrite or refactor? +
Refactor incrementally in most cases — a live product with real users rarely survives a big-bang rewrite on schedule. A rewrite is the honest answer when the stack is genuinely dead, the codebase is small, or there are few users to disrupt; when the audit shows that, we say so instead of selling the longer engagement. The audit exists precisely to make this call from evidence rather than instinct.
Will the product stay live during modernization? +
Yes — that is the point of working in incremental slices. Each new module ships beside the old one behind a stable interface, is verified in production, and only then takes over traffic, with a rollback path if it misbehaves. Your users see a product that gradually gets faster and more reliable, not a maintenance window.
What if the audit finds the code is fine? +
Then we tell you the code is fine and the engagement stops there — the audit report is yours either way. Fine code with a slow product usually points somewhere else: infrastructure, a missing index, or a process problem, and the report names the likely culprit. We would rather lose a modernization engagement than bill months of work against a codebase that did not need it.
One call. One fixed number.
Tell us about your app modernization project.
30 minutes, no deck. A fixed quote follows within 48 hours.