Details
| Founded: | 2014 |
|---|---|
| Hourly Rates: | N/A |
| Employees: | 10 - 49 |
| Avg. Project Cost: | $25,000+ |
| Ratings: |
4.3
7 Reviews
|
Industries Served
About
Their success is driven by a powerful team of experts with expertise in web technologies, software development & Open source technologies. They have the manpower to provide to their customer’s needs. They assure you solutions to support, extend, create and together implement an economic increase to your company at a global level. They strive to connect the latest technology with no reduction in the compactness of app development.
INFINTOR Reviews
Sensor network and the analytics layer on top were both handled by people who understood each half
Angus Fairbanks / Chief Digital Officer | Jun 06, 2026Looking back, the thing that stands out most is how uneventful the whole project was. Technology projects of this size tend to generate their share of fire drills and awkward escalation calls. This one really didn't. Issues got flagged early enough that they never became incidents, scope changes went through an actual process instead of a tense phone call, and risks were tracked rather than just hoped away. That kind of quiet competence is unusual in my experience, and it made the whole thing feel easier on our end than I know it was on theirs.
Project summary
Our trading platform had been patched together for close to a decade. Latency was creeping up, technical debt was compounding, and a proper rebuild had stopped being optional.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 5.0 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | IoT Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $10,000 to $49,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jan 2026 - May 2026 |
| Business Type: | Financial Services |
|---|---|
| Location: | Brisbane, Australia |
Questions & Answers
They clearly understood the gap between an AI demo and an AI that survives production
Marc-Antoine Girard / VP of Innovation | May 08, 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
Years of incremental patches had left us with a platform that technically worked but was quietly holding the business back strategically. A proper rebuild was the agreed way forward.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | AI & Machine Learning |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | Less than $10,000 |
| Project Duration: | Oct 2025 - Mar 2026 |
| Business Type: | Sports & Fitness |
|---|---|
| Location: | Montreal, Canada |
Questions & Answers
Gameplay feel matched the original design intent — harder to nail than most people assume
Nicolas Fontaine / Directeur Technique | May 07, 2026What actually moved the needle wasn't their ability to follow a spec — any competent team can do that. It was their willingness to push back when a requirement didn't make sense, explain clearly why, and help us decide on something better instead. That extra layer of judgment took the final product past what we'd actually asked for and closer to what we genuinely needed, which isn't always the same thing.
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.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Game Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | Aug 2025 - Apr 2026 |
| Business Type: | Construction |
|---|---|
| Location: | Lyon, France |
Questions & Answers
The immersive demo generated more press coverage than anything we'd shipped in years
Femke Visser / Head of Platform Engineering | Apr 06, 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
The handoff between our clinic system and our patient app kept breaking in the same places. We needed a partner willing to own that integration end to end, not just patch it again.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | AR/VR Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | Less than $10,000 |
| Project Duration: | Sep 2025 - Mar 2026 |
| Business Type: | Healthcare |
|---|---|
| Location: | The Hague, Netherlands |
Questions & Answers
Our internal teams have genuinely forgotten infrastructure used to be a source of stress
Grayson Whitfield / VP of Engineering | Feb 26, 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
This project had a board-facing deadline tied to a wider strategic push. We needed a partner who'd treat that date like it was their own problem, not just ours.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | IT Managed Services |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | Jul 2025 - Nov 2025 |
| Business Type: | Mining & Metals |
|---|---|
| Location: | Boston, USA |
Questions & Answers
Treated our product's quality like it was their own reputation on the line
Marcus Teo / CTO | Jan 27, 2026Going in, the integration work was what worried me most. Our systems landscape is messy, a couple of the third-party APIs we depend on are barely documented, and one of those vendors has a well-earned reputation for slow, inconsistent support. This team absorbed all of that. They documented what the upstream providers wouldn't, built in resilience wherever the upstream behavior was flaky, and shipped something that has worked exactly as specified since go-live. I genuinely couldn't have asked for more on that front.
Project summary
Warehouse errors were becoming visible to clients, not just internal reporting. A modernized WMS was already the agreed direction internally — we just needed someone to actually build it.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 3.5 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Quality Assurance & Testing |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | Jan 2025 - Oct 2025 |
| Business Type: | Logistics & Supply Chain |
|---|---|
| Location: | Singapore |
Questions & Answers
They were thinking mobile-first before we'd even finished writing the brief
Fiona McAllister / Chief Technology Officer | Jan 26, 2026The easiest thing to praise is the technical output itself — solid test coverage, a deployment pipeline that just works, documentation that people actually reference instead of ignoring. But what I keep coming back to is the number of conversations we haven't had to have since launch. No 2am incident calls. No emergency patches. No post-mortems about what went sideways. That absence is really the whole pitch, if you ask me.
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.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 5.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Mobile App Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | Jul 2025 - Nov 2025 |
| Business Type: | Aerospace & Defense |
|---|---|
| Location: | Glasgow, UK |
Questions & Answers
Frequently Asked Questions
Got questions about our specialized technology solutions? We have the answers to help you make informed decisions.

