Today, with AI tools, templates, and vibe coding workflows, a single person can build in days<\/strong> what used to take a small team weeks. That sounds like good news, and it is. But it changes the game. When software becomes easier to produce, the real bottleneck moves upstream.<\/p>\n The scarce skill is no longer just execution. It is judgment.<\/strong><\/p>\n That is the core idea behind What to Code<\/a><\/em>: in a world where almost anything can be built, the real advantage comes from choosing the right thing to build.<\/p>\n The book makes a simple but powerful point: most projects fail long before launch, not because the code is bad, but because the premise is weak. Builders fall in love with elegant solutions, trendy categories, or new technical capabilities, then go looking for a problem to attach them to. That is backwards.<\/p>\n A better approach is to start with pain.<\/strong><\/p>\n Not vague dissatisfaction. Not \u201cpeople want to be more productive.\u201d Real pain. Repeated pain. Costly pain. The kind that already shows up in workarounds, spreadsheets, manual cleanup, delays, mistakes, or quiet frustration that someone has learned to tolerate because there is no better option.<\/p>\n That is where good software opportunities<\/strong> usually come from.<\/p>\n One of the most useful ideas in the book is that strong opportunities tend to have four traits: <\/p>\n That fit matters more than most people think. The same idea can be great for one founder and terrible for another, depending on access, trust, domain knowledge, and distribution.<\/p>\n Another big takeaway: specificity beats breadth.<\/strong><\/p>\n Broad ideas sound exciting. \u201cAI for small business operations\u201d<\/em><\/strong> sounds bigger than \u201ca tool that catches missing attachments before insurance claims are submitted.\u201d<\/em><\/strong> But broadness usually hides weak urgency. Specificity is what makes products adoptable. A concrete problem in a real workflow is easier to explain, easier to test, easier to sell, and easier to improve.<\/p>\n The book is also strong on validation. Demand is not praise. It is not likes, compliments, or \u201cthat sounds useful.\u201d Demand is behavior. Do people try it? Come back? Change their workflow? Pay? Recommend it?<\/strong> If not, the signal is weak, no matter how encouraging the conversation felt.<\/p>\n The deepest lesson is probably this: boring problems are underrated.<\/strong><\/p>\n A lot of money is hiding in ugly workflows — invoicing, approvals, claims, scheduling, reporting, reconciliation, handoffs, compliance checks, repetitive admin. These problems are not glamorous, but they are expensive. And expensive, recurring friction is exactly where small software businesses become real businesses.<\/p>\n The book\u2019s core argument is simple: in a world where building software is getting easier, the main advantage is no longer raw execution speed. The advantage is choosing a problem that is painful, repeated, reachable, and close enough to your own edge that you can actually solve and sell it. The mistake most builders make is starting with an idea, a tool, or a capability. A better process is to start with a recurring cost in the real world: wasted time, repeated errors, messy handoffs, manual cleanup, delayed billing, unclear approvals, or ugly workarounds people tolerate because nothing better exists.<\/p>\nPain is the Way<\/h2>\n
\n
The Money is in the Niche<\/h2>\n
Automate the … Boring Stuff?<\/h2>\n
What to Code — the practical summary<\/h2>\n
The useful filter<\/h3>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blog.finxter.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/image-2-683x1024.png\")
<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n