There's also an interesting path to monetization: it's pretty much models the buying process, esp for the enterprise. Also generalises to purchasing decisions, in general - it's relevant to all transactions. i.e. the whole economy.
However... very hard to do well. It's good start, but nailing it will take a lot of time, effort and luck. Starting in this very focussed and narrow niche is a great way to build understanding of what's needed and how to do it.
EDIT I found the site slow to load (actually got the wait or cancel dialog). Because such a site thrives on as many users as possible, it may be more important to make it accessible to more people at the expense of prettiness (I assume the pie-charts are partly to blame for the slowness). It also biases the answers and votes (maybe a good thing - target that niche?); might explain why emacs got few votes.
The presentation of information is too "detail-heavy" (i) the list of questions includes 3 alternatives and even some lines about each. The typical user wants to scan the topics to find one of interest. (though I guess having a some context is good, since that's what SO does; but only to clarify the question, not the answer).
(ii) in the actual answer, there's no summary of the results [EDIT whoops, there is a summary; somehow I went directly to one of alternatives at first]; no comparison of the alternatives; and no indication of what context each tool best suits ("job" for the tool); instead, each page is all about one alternative. I would guess that something like a grid might work better, with the tools listed vertically, and the attributes horizontally (with the "job"/context first). The user can then scroll down to examine each point in detail (or maybe drill-down, with expanding sections, for truly secondary/tertiary content, like comments/debates). Attributes could be voted on.
In short: organise it to suit the user-task, not the subject matter.