Details
| Founded: | 2012 |
|---|---|
| Hourly Rates: | N/A |
| Employees: | 2 - 9 |
| Avg. Project Cost: | $10,000+ |
| Ratings: |
4.1
7 Reviews
|
Industries Served
About
It was established in 2012. They are a group of dreamers, developers, and imaginative thinkers. They are an excellent partner & provides many of mobile expertise to the table. They are especially involved in the advantage of the project & work intimately with their skilled team. They think that app development is strong products requires knowing both the company objects and the market relationship.
AMBR Detroit Reviews
The return on this investment outpaced the business case we originally approved
Faisal Al-Dosari / Head of Innovation | May 14, 2026Our stakeholder list for this project included board members, operations leads, compliance, and end users, all with wildly different levels of technical fluency and different definitions of success. Managing that mix well is genuinely hard, and this team did it better than any vendor we've worked with. They shifted register depending on who they were talking to without ever dumbing down the substance, kept expectations honest the whole way through, and delivered something each group could point to as meeting their own bar. That range is rare.
Project summary
Our internal engineering capacity was fully committed to keeping existing systems running, with no room for a build of this size. An outside partner with the right depth was really our only option.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Embedded Systems Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jul 2025 - Apr 2026 |
| Business Type: | Environmental Services |
|---|---|
| Location: | Dammam, Saudi Arabia |
Questions & Answers
Post-release incidents dropped by half within three months of this program starting
Marcus Teo / CTO | Apr 22, 2026Five months post-launch, we're running at roughly double the transaction volume we'd specified in the original scope document, and the platform hasn't needed a single structural change to handle it. That's the real tell for whether a team designed for what you told them versus what you were actually going to need. We're now scoping a second phase and I expect this to be a multi-year relationship at this point.
Project summary
A previous project had worked fine in staging and fallen apart in production. We approached vendor selection this time with a lot more scrutiny as a direct result.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 3.5 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Quality Assurance & Testing |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Sep 2025 - Jan 2026 |
| Business Type: | Mining & Metals |
|---|---|
| Location: | Singapore |
Questions & Answers
Gave us an honest read of where we stood, then a credible plan to move from there
Bianca Alvarado / Chief Product Officer | Apr 15, 2026This was our fourth agency in three years, and I say that with some embarrassment. Every previous engagement had looked promising on paper and fallen apart somewhere in delivery. What was different here was the sequencing: they spent real time understanding the actual problem before proposing anything, rather than pattern-matching to a solution they already knew how to sell. The build ran to schedule, our own engineers had genuinely positive things to say during handover, and four months into live operation we haven't had a single critical incident. We're already talking about the next phase with them.
Project summary
Our app was sitting at a 2.9-star average, and nearly every negative review mentioned the same two things: speed and how convoluted the booking flow had become.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 3.5 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | IT Consulting |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Oct 2025 - Feb 2026 |
| Business Type: | Travel & Hospitality |
|---|---|
| Location: | San Diego, USA |
Questions & Answers
Started as a single project and earned a permanent spot on our preferred vendor list
Margaux Lefèvre / Head of Digital Products | Apr 13, 2026Our stakeholder list for this project included board members, operations leads, compliance, and end users, all with wildly different levels of technical fluency and different definitions of success. Managing that mix well is genuinely hard, and this team did it better than any vendor we've worked with. They shifted register depending on who they were talking to without ever dumbing down the substance, kept expectations honest the whole way through, and delivered something each group could point to as meeting their own bar. That range is rare.
Project summary
Our field service system hadn't seen a serious update in years, and a growing technician headcount combined with increasingly complex jobs had exposed every one of its limits.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Embedded Systems Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | Sep 2025 - Mar 2026 |
| Business Type: | Energy & Utilities |
|---|---|
| Location: | Nice, France |
Questions & Answers
A team that clearly played the game obsessively before building a single feature
Anton Berggren / Chief Technology Officer | Apr 04, 2026We handed this team an aggressive deadline, a genuinely complicated scope, and a client-side team on our end that was stretched thin and slow to respond at times. They handled all of it without complaint. When they needed something from us they asked precisely and on time. When they didn't, they just kept moving. The project still landed on schedule despite our side being the weaker link for a good chunk of it, which tells you something about how they operate under pressure.
Project summary
Our product thinking internally was solid, but our execution depth in this particular technical domain wasn't. We needed real specialists, not another generalist team.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 3.5 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Game Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $150,000 to $499,999 |
| Project Duration: | May 2025 - Mar 2026 |
| Business Type: | Nonprofit & NGO |
|---|---|
| Location: | Malmö, Sweden |
Questions & Answers
Technically sharp, commercially sensible, and genuinely easy to work with throughout
Wei Ling Ong / VP of Engineering | Mar 21, 2026We had proposals in hand ranging from roughly half to well over double what we eventually paid this team. What set their proposal apart wasn't the price — it was that the number matched what they actually delivered, almost line for line. I've been burned before by proposals that were really just opening offers in a negotiation that continues throughout the project. That wasn't the case here, and I don't say that lightly.
Project summary
Our regulatory submission timelines needed a document platform that could handle version control, permissions, and audit trails at a scale our existing tools were never built for.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 3.5 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | POS System Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Nov 2025 - Feb 2026 |
| Business Type: | Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology |
|---|---|
| Location: | Singapore |
Questions & Answers
Scaled from a ten-unit pilot to full fleet deployment without a single architectural rework
Konstantin Bauer / Leiter Digitalisierung | Jan 24, 2026I went into this engagement genuinely skeptical. A previous vendor had left us with a system that technically worked but that nobody trusted, and I wasn't interested in repeating that experience. This team earned trust the slow way — solid discovery documentation, technical proposals that held up under scrutiny, sprints that landed when promised, and ultimately a production system that has simply behaved. I don't open conversations about them with caveats anymore.
Project summary
Our LMS had been designed for a classroom-only world, and two years of declining satisfaction scores made the hybrid-delivery gaps impossible to ignore any longer.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 3.5 Schedule |
| 3.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | IoT Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | Mar 2025 - Dec 2025 |
| Business Type: | Education |
|---|---|
| Location: | Munich, Germany |
Questions & Answers
Frequently Asked Questions
Got questions about our specialized technology solutions? We have the answers to help you make informed decisions.

