Software Architecture & Technical Consulting
Independent architecture and code reviews, technical due diligence and design advice, so big technical decisions rest on evidence, not habit.
10 services
Describe the problem in plain words. We'll point you to the right starting point, even when that isn't us.
Consulting from $1,900 · Development from $2,500
Compare all servicesSoftware Development · Service 06
Make aging software safe to change again: an honest assessment, tests around what works, then upgrades or staged replacement with no big-bang cutover.
What this service is
A system that has run your business for years has earned some respect. It becomes a liability the day nobody can change it safely, patch it or explain what it does.
Legacy modernization is the work of making an aging system safe to change again. It might be a VB6 or Delphi desktop application, a Microsoft Access database that grew into a business system, a PHP site from before modern frameworks, or a .NET Framework application on a server that no longer receives security updates. The software usually still does its job. What's missing is a supported platform underneath it, tests around it and people who understand it.
We start with an assessment, not a rewrite. Rewriting from scratch is slow and expensive, and it tends to lose the small rules the old system enforces without anyone remembering why. The better route is often to pin down current behavior with tests, upgrade the platform, and replace the risky parts one at a time while everything keeps running. Sometimes the honest answer is to leave the system alone and fix the two things that actually hurt, and we'll say so.
Problems we solve
Old software rarely fails in one dramatic moment. It gets harder to live with, one workaround at a time. Here's what that tends to look like.
What you get
Not every engagement includes every item. Your proposal lists exactly what's in scope, and what isn't.
A written review of the code, data, dependencies and hosting, with a recommendation for each part (leave it alone, refactor, re-platform or replace in stages) and what each option costs.
Automated tests that record what the system does today, quirks included, so every later change is checked against real behavior rather than memory.
Architecture diagrams, a data dictionary, business rules traced out of the code, and the build and deployment steps that used to live in one person's head.
Moves to supported versions of the language, runtime and libraries in measured steps, such as .NET Framework to current .NET, or an old PHP release to a supported one.
Known vulnerabilities patched, hard-coded passwords removed, injection risks closed, and access control and logging added where they were missing.
New components built alongside the old system behind a routing layer (the strangler-fig approach), each taking over one function until the old part can be switched off.
Records moved out of Access, old SQL Server versions or flat files into a current database, with encoding problems, duplicates and orphaned rows resolved and counts checked on both sides.
Each switchover rehearsed on a copy first, run in parallel where the stakes justify it, timed around your busy periods, and backed by a tested route back.
Visual model
How the pieces typically fit together on this kind of engagement.
Common use cases
Practical patterns rather than industry labels. The shape of the problem matters more than the sector.
Line-of-business tools still running on Windows desktops, moved to a supported platform or rebuilt as web applications one screen at a time.
Multi-user Access files on a shared drive, moved to a proper database server with a web front end, keeping the reports people depend on.
Portals and sites on old PHP versions or abandoned frameworks, upgraded in steps, secured and brought under version control with automated tests.
Web Forms sites, WCF services and Windows services upgraded or re-platformed onto current .NET, ready to run on Linux, in containers or in the cloud.
Applications tied to an old Windows Server or SQL Server installation, moved to supported infrastructure with monitoring, and backups that are test-restored on a schedule.
Applications whose original developer has disappeared, sometimes with incomplete source code: documented from the running system and its database, then stabilized or rebuilt.
Our approach
The parts of our method that matter most for legacy modernization.
We read the code, map the data and talk to the people who use the system, then recommend the smallest change that removes the real risk. Sometimes that's no change at all.
Characterization tests capture what the system actually does, odd results included, so we can rework the internals and prove the outputs haven't moved.
New components take over one function at a time. Each slice goes live on its own, so every step is small and the old system stays available as a fallback.
An odd rounding rule or a special case for one large customer is often the most valuable thing in old code. We find those rules, write them down and carry them forward on purpose.
Each release has a tested way back, data changes are rehearsed on copies first, and cutovers are scheduled around your calendar, not ours.
Project stages
Each stage has a defined output and a review point, so you always know where the work stands.
How our process worksA review of code, data, hosting and dependencies, interviews with users, and a written report with options and costs.
Source control, a repeatable build, verified backups, urgent security fixes and characterization tests around the critical paths.
Language, framework, library and operating system upgrades in small, tested steps, each one released before the next begins.
The parts worth replacing are rebuilt alongside the old system and switched over one function at a time.
Final data migration, a rehearsed switchover, parallel running where it's justified, and a rollback kept ready.
Old components switched off, data archived under your retention rules, unused licenses canceled and a patching schedule agreed for what remains.
Capabilities
Only the capabilities that matter for this service, and nothing we wouldn't actually recommend.
Delivery and engagement
Legacy work carries more unknowns than a new build, which is why the assessment comes first and later phases are quoted once we've seen the code. The size and state of the source, data quality and testing time on your side all shape the schedule.
Who it's for
We work with companies, organizations and individuals. The requirement matters more than the size of the buyer.
Related services
Independent architecture and code reviews, technical due diligence and design advice, so big technical decisions rest on evidence, not habit.
Decide what to move, rebuild, keep or retire, model the real costs, then migrate in planned waves with a tested way back at every step.
Connect your CRM, ERP, accounting, store and payment systems so data moves on its own, mapped in writing, retried safely and monitored.
Service FAQ
Usually not. A full rewrite means paying to rebuild everything the system already does, including rules nobody remembers until they're missing, while you run two systems and wait months for any benefit. Replacing in stages delivers value sooner and keeps each risk small. A rewrite can make sense for a small system on a dead-end platform with well-understood rules, and the assessment will tell you if that's your situation.
It happens, and it's workable. We document behavior from the running application, its database, its reports and the people who use it. That record becomes the specification for recovering what exists, rebuilding the gaps, or replacing the system in stages.
No. That's the main reason to work in stages. Changes are designed to go live without users noticing anything except fewer problems. Where a switchover can't be avoided, such as the final data migration, we rehearse it on a copy, schedule it for your quietest hours and keep the old system ready to switch back to.
Yes, and it's often the right call. If the core works and only the reporting or the customer-facing side hurts, we can put an API in front of the old system and build the new part on top, leaving the stable core alone until there's a real reason to touch it.
That's where modernization work starts: an assessment of one application of moderate size, or a contained job such as a framework upgrade on a small, well-understood codebase. Bigger programs are quoted phase by phase once we've seen the code, so you're never committing to a large project blind.
Final pricing depends on the size and condition of the codebase, data quality, hosting and how much is being replaced. Each phase is quoted separately, in writing, once the assessment is done.
Tell us what you're trying to achieve. We'll come back with a clear view of the scope, the approach and the cost, and if we're not the right fit, we'll say so quickly.