Details
| Founded: | 2008 |
|---|---|
| Hourly Rates: | $25 - $49 |
| Employees: | 10 - 49 |
| Avg. Project Cost: | $50,000+ |
| Ratings: |
4.8
6 Reviews
|
Industries Served
Logistics & Supply Chain
Telecommunications
Advertising & Marketing
Financial Services
Retail & E-commerce
Manufacturing
About
Their company was established in 2008. Their goal is to provide development outsourcing & technology solutions to various companies by developing the methodology of their clients. There is no way to be the best without having the genuine people. They love what they do, and one of the main purposes is that they have an experienced and close-knit team.
INMIND Reviews
4.8
6 Reviews
Technically sharp, commercially sensible, and genuinely easy to work with throughout
Hamish Bellamy / GM of Technology | May 12, 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
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.
| 5.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 5.0 Schedule |
| 5.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Low-Code / No-Code Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | Less than $10,000 |
| Project Duration: | Nov 2025 - Mar 2026 |
| Business Type: | Logistics & Supply Chain |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, Australia |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Tasman Commerce Group, a growth-stage Logistics & Supply Chain company based in Melbourne, Australia. My role as GM of Technology covers product engineering, platform operations, and our vendor relationships. We'd hit a point where our internal capacity just couldn't keep pace with what the roadmap demanded.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our previous vendor had maintained this platform for a few years, and the technical debt had piled up to the point where our delivery speed had dropped to a fraction of what it used to be. We needed fresh engineering eyes and an actual plan to deal with the underlying mess.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The scope ran the full Low-Code / No-Code Development lifecycle — discovery, requirements, architecture, development across roughly a dozen sprints, integration testing, performance validation, deployment, and a four-week hypercare window afterward. They also handed over full documentation and ran a knowledge transfer session for our internal team.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
The questions they asked during the briefing stage told us most of what we needed to know. Vendors who ask sharp questions during sales tend to bring that same rigor into delivery, and that held up. The technical proposal had real substance, the team was senior from the start, and the pricing was straightforward.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Thoroughly. The requirements document was detailed enough that our own QA team used it directly to build acceptance criteria. Every user story had a clear business reason attached, and nothing was left open to interpretation. That discipline early on paid off through the rest of development and testing.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
The most structured project management I've dealt with from any outside vendor. Sprint planning was tight, acceptance criteria were specific, and retrospectives actually led to changes rather than just being a box to tick. The backlog and risk register were both treated as live tools, not paperwork. I never once had to chase a status update.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Yes to both. I'd quietly built in some contingency given the complexity and the number of integrations involved, and none of it ended up being needed. Delivery landed on the agreed date and the final invoice was within a rounding error of the approved budget — rarer than most people in this industry would admit.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The ROI model we took to the board was deliberately conservative. Current performance against that model puts us on track to hit payback well ahead of the eighteen-month target we set. The operational efficiency gains in particular have outpaced the model, partly because the new platform's data quality supports decisions the old system simply couldn't.
What did you like most about working with this company?
The team stayed the same the whole way through. The engineers in the discovery sessions were the same ones who built the system. That continuity matters more than people expect, and you really only notice it when it's missing. Every conversation picked up where the last one left off.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes — though I'll add that they're not the cheapest option out there and they're selective about what they take on. If price is your main filter, look elsewhere. If you need a partner you can trust with a serious Low-Code / No-Code Development program in Logistics & Supply Chain and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.
The immersive demo generated more press coverage than anything we'd shipped in years
Delphine Rousseau / Director of Platform Engineering | Mar 10, 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
Portal usability complaints were showing up disproportionately among the B2B accounts we were about to lose at renewal. The self-service experience needed a full rebuild before that cycle hit.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 5.0 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | AR/VR Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jun 2025 - Jan 2026 |
| Business Type: | Telecommunications |
|---|---|
| Location: | Vancouver, Canada |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Director of Platform Engineering at Pacific Crest Ventures I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Telecommunications operations out of Vancouver, Canada. We're a commercially minded business, so every technology decision gets judged on what it actually contributes to the bottom line, not on how elegant it looks on paper.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Regulation in our Telecommunications segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the AR/VR Development changes required justified bringing in a specialist rather than pulling our internal team off the product roadmap to handle it.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The core of it was AR/VR Development, though their involvement grew to include technical consulting during discovery that meaningfully sharpened our own requirements. They also took full ownership of the third-party integration work, which had been a coordination headache on past projects, and just handled it themselves.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We were coming off a failed engagement and went into vendor selection this time with a lot more scrutiny. We asked pointed questions about how they handle scope changes, how they estimate, how they communicate bad news. The answers were specific and consistent across everyone we spoke to on their team, which gave us confidence it wasn't a rehearsed pitch.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Better than we understood them ourselves, honestly. The workshops they ran surfaced assumptions we'd never questioned and exposed a few requirements that flatly contradicted each other. Sorting that out before development started saved us from what would have been serious rework later.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
The most structured project management I've dealt with from any outside vendor. Sprint planning was tight, acceptance criteria were specific, and retrospectives actually led to changes rather than just being a box to tick. The backlog and risk register were both treated as live tools, not paperwork. I never once had to chase a status update.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
The project came in on schedule. Budget stayed within the agreed ceiling, including one scope addition we asked for ourselves, which was quoted fairly and handled without disturbing the rest of the timeline. Nothing about the invoice came as a surprise.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The ROI model we took to the board was deliberately conservative. Current performance against that model puts us on track to hit payback well ahead of the eighteen-month target we set. The operational efficiency gains in particular have outpaced the model, partly because the new platform's data quality supports decisions the old system simply couldn't.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their instinct for never losing the business goal in the middle of technical decisions. I've worked with technically strong teams before who lose that thread once things get complicated. This team kept every architectural call tied back to the outcome we'd actually agreed to, which made the harder trade-off conversations a lot easier.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes — though I'll add that they're not the cheapest option out there and they're selective about what they take on. If price is your main filter, look elsewhere. If you need a partner you can trust with a serious AR/VR Development program in Telecommunications and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.
Freed our analysts from repetitive number-crunching to focus on the interpretation instead
Marcus Teo / CTO | Feb 13, 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
Multi-touch attribution across our media mix was the single most requested capability from clients across our whole portfolio, and we couldn't deliver it without rebuilding the data layer underneath.
| 5.0 Overall Rating |
| 5.0 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 5.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | AI & Machine Learning |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $10,000 to $49,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jun 2025 - Dec 2025 |
| Business Type: | Advertising & Marketing |
|---|---|
| Location: | Singapore |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Sentosa Ventures Pte Ltd is a Advertising & Marketing business headquartered in Singapore. As CTO I'm responsible for the whole technology agenda — infrastructure, product, and how we pick vendors. Every decision we make on the technology side has to tie back to a clear business case before it gets approved.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
A competitor move forced our hand and compressed a roadmap item we'd planned for the following year. The AI & Machine Learning investment we'd scheduled twelve months out suddenly needed to happen in six, and building it internally in that window wasn't realistic.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Mainly AI & Machine Learning, with some adjacent architecture and QA work folded in. They owned the whole thing from requirements to go-live, including hooking it into four of our existing systems. Not needing a second vendor to cover that ground was genuinely useful, both cost-wise and logistically.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
The questions they asked during the briefing stage told us most of what we needed to know. Vendors who ask sharp questions during sales tend to bring that same rigor into delivery, and that held up. The technical proposal had real substance, the team was senior from the start, and the pricing was straightforward.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Thoroughly. The requirements document was detailed enough that our own QA team used it directly to build acceptance criteria. Every user story had a clear business reason attached, and nothing was left open to interpretation. That discipline early on paid off through the rest of development and testing.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Genuinely excellent, especially given the time difference between Singapore and the delivery team. Written updates were consistent and specific, anything needing a decision got same-day turnaround, and nothing slipped through the cracks across the whole engagement.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
The project came in on schedule. Budget stayed within the agreed ceiling, including one scope addition we asked for ourselves, which was quoted fairly and handled without disturbing the rest of the timeline. Nothing about the invoice came as a surprise.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the AI & Machine Learning work are solid: session duration up, conversion up, error rate down, and our NPS for that touchpoint has moved noticeably. Our account managers say it's coming up positively in client conversations now too.
What did you like most about working with this company?
The team stayed the same the whole way through. The engineers in the discovery sessions were the same ones who built the system. That continuity matters more than people expect, and you really only notice it when it's missing. Every conversation picked up where the last one left off.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes — though I'll add that they're not the cheapest option out there and they're selective about what they take on. If price is your main filter, look elsewhere. If you need a partner you can trust with a serious AI & Machine Learning program in Advertising & Marketing and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.
The return on this investment outpaced the business case we originally approved
Rashid Al-Marzouqi / Chief Technology Officer | Jan 30, 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
New open banking rules meant our API layer needed rebuilding from scratch, with compliance designed in from the start rather than patched on afterward.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 5.0 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Embedded Systems Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $10,000 to $49,999 |
| Project Duration: | Mar 2025 - Oct 2025 |
| Business Type: | Financial Services |
|---|---|
| Location: | Sharjah, UAE |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Chief Technology Officer at Beacon Digital Ventures I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Financial Services operations out of Sharjah, UAE. We're a commercially minded business, so every technology decision gets judged on what it actually contributes to the bottom line, not on how elegant it looks on paper.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our previous vendor had maintained this platform for a few years, and the technical debt had piled up to the point where our delivery speed had dropped to a fraction of what it used to be. We needed fresh engineering eyes and an actual plan to deal with the underlying mess.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The scope ran the full Embedded Systems Development lifecycle — discovery, requirements, architecture, development across roughly a dozen sprints, integration testing, performance validation, deployment, and a four-week hypercare window afterward. They also handed over full documentation and ran a knowledge transfer session for our internal team.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We shortlisted five vendors through a structured process. The technical review knocked two out right away. Of the remaining three, this team stood out because their Embedded Systems Development approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Financial Services — not just case studies pulled off a website. The reference calls confirmed everything the proposal claimed.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Really well, partly because they already had Financial Services experience that cut down on the amount of context we had to provide. They knew the terminology, asked the right questions, and translated our business requirements into technical specs accurately enough that development barely needed any clarification cycles.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Professional throughout. The project manager always had a clear view of the critical path and flagged changes to it honestly, without spin. The one significant scope change we made mid-project went through a clean process — fairly priced, clearly documented, and absorbed without knocking the rest of the timeline off course.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Yes to both. I'd quietly built in some contingency given the complexity and the number of integrations involved, and none of it ended up being needed. Delivery landed on the agreed date and the final invoice was within a rounding error of the approved budget — rarer than most people in this industry would admit.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The clearest measure is how the system's actually performing in production. In the four months since go-live we've had zero major incidents, our page performance scores improved across every Core Web Vitals metric, and two enterprise clients who'd previously flagged our old platform's limits during renewal talks signed again without raising it.
What did you like most about working with this company?
What they did after launch. A lot of vendors treat go-live as the finish line. This team treated it as the start of a different phase — the hypercare period was substantial, the documentation held up in practice, and they checked back in at the thirty and ninety day marks to go over production metrics with us unprompted.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes, no hesitation. I've already referred them twice within my own Financial Services network, both times to people facing Embedded Systems Development problems similar to ours. I made those referrals confidently because I know the experience I had was repeatable, not a one-off stroke of luck on our project.
Their architecture review steered us away from a vendor decision we would have regretted
Julian Ashworth / Head of Digital Strategy | Jan 27, 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 funnel data made it obvious exactly where we were losing customers, and it wasn't subtle. We needed a platform capable of the experience our competitors were already delivering.
| 5.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 5.0 Schedule |
| 5.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | IT Consulting |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | Less than $10,000 |
| Project Duration: | Mar 2025 - Oct 2025 |
| Business Type: | Retail & E-commerce |
|---|---|
| Location: | London, UK |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Kingswood Consulting Ltd, a growth-stage Retail & E-commerce company based in London, UK. My role as Head of Digital Strategy covers product engineering, platform operations, and our vendor relationships. We'd hit a point where our internal capacity just couldn't keep pace with what the roadmap demanded.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our IT Consulting capability had become the thing slowing everything else down. New feature requests, client asks, internal initiatives — all of it kept queuing up behind a platform that had been stretched way past what it was originally built for. We needed a proper rebuild, not another patch.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Mainly IT Consulting, with some adjacent architecture and QA work folded in. They owned the whole thing from requirements to go-live, including hooking it into four of our existing systems. Not needing a second vendor to cover that ground was genuinely useful, both cost-wise and logistically.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We were coming off a failed engagement and went into vendor selection this time with a lot more scrutiny. We asked pointed questions about how they handle scope changes, how they estimate, how they communicate bad news. The answers were specific and consistent across everyone we spoke to on their team, which gave us confidence it wasn't a rehearsed pitch.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Very well. The discovery phase was more thorough than anything we'd been through with prior vendors. They pushed back on requirements that were vague or contradictory, suggested better alternatives where our own thinking was limited, and produced a spec our internal stakeholders agreed was the clearest version of the product they'd ever seen written down.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Proactive and well-calibrated. Technical detail for the engineering side, plain summaries for the steering group, and risk flags that came with a proposed fix attached rather than just a problem statement. The biweekly sprint reviews kept our stakeholders in the loop without requiring them to sit in on every working session.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
The project came in on schedule. Budget stayed within the agreed ceiling, including one scope addition we asked for ourselves, which was quoted fairly and handled without disturbing the rest of the timeline. Nothing about the invoice came as a surprise.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the IT Consulting work are solid: session duration up, conversion up, error rate down, and our NPS for that touchpoint has moved noticeably. Our account managers say it's coming up positively in client conversations now too.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their willingness to just be direct. If our requirements were unclear, they said so. If our priorities contradicted each other, they explained why. If an approach we'd assumed was right actually had real downsides, they told us before we'd committed to it. That kind of honesty is exactly what I look for in a long-term partner.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Absolutely, with one caveat worth mentioning: the value really starts in discovery, so clients who take that phase seriously will get the most out of it. We put real effort in upfront and it clearly paid off in what got delivered.
Gameplay feel matched the original design intent — harder to nail than most people assume
Anjali Raghunathan / VP of Data Science | Jan 10, 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
Unplanned downtime had become our biggest single cost line, and our own data suggested predictive maintenance could fix most of it — if we had the infrastructure to act on the signal.
| 5.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 5.0 Schedule |
| 5.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Game Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $10,000 to $49,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jul 2025 - Nov 2025 |
| Business Type: | Manufacturing |
|---|---|
| Location: | Seattle, USA |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Clearwave Analytics Inc, a growth-stage Manufacturing company based in Seattle, USA. My role as VP of Data Science covers product engineering, platform operations, and our vendor relationships. We'd hit a point where our internal capacity just couldn't keep pace with what the roadmap demanded.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our previous vendor had maintained this platform for a few years, and the technical debt had piled up to the point where our delivery speed had dropped to a fraction of what it used to be. We needed fresh engineering eyes and an actual plan to deal with the underlying mess.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Full Game Development delivery, with particular depth on the integration and data migration pieces — the riskiest parts of the whole program. On top of that, they kept a dedicated QA person on the project throughout and left our operations team with a proper runbook at handover.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
A peer in the Manufacturing space had used them for something similar in Game Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Game Development depth, and a track record of actually delivering — that combination made the decision easy.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Thoroughly. The requirements document was detailed enough that our own QA team used it directly to build acceptance criteria. Every user story had a clear business reason attached, and nothing was left open to interpretation. That discipline early on paid off through the rest of development and testing.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Proactive and well-calibrated. Technical detail for the engineering side, plain summaries for the steering group, and risk flags that came with a proposed fix attached rather than just a problem statement. The biweekly sprint reviews kept our stakeholders in the loop without requiring them to sit in on every working session.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Both, yes. One sprint hit a one-week delay from a third-party API dependency outside anyone's control. The team flagged it three weeks ahead of time, laid out two options, and we picked an approach that clawed the schedule back within the same sprint. That's the kind of foresight that separates real project management from just reacting to problems.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The ROI model we took to the board was deliberately conservative. Current performance against that model puts us on track to hit payback well ahead of the eighteen-month target we set. The operational efficiency gains in particular have outpaced the model, partly because the new platform's data quality supports decisions the old system simply couldn't.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their instinct for never losing the business goal in the middle of technical decisions. I've worked with technically strong teams before who lose that thread once things get complicated. This team kept every architectural call tied back to the outcome we'd actually agreed to, which made the harder trade-off conversations a lot easier.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes, no hesitation. I've already referred them twice within my own Manufacturing network, both times to people facing Game Development problems similar to ours. I made those referrals confidently because I know the experience I had was repeatable, not a one-off stroke of luck on our project.
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
Got questions about our specialized technology solutions? We have the answers to help you make informed decisions.
INMIND typically covers the standard range of software development work — mobile apps, web platforms, custom internal tools, UI/UX design, cloud infrastructure, AI integrations, and larger enterprise builds. Its core focus areas include AR App Development, Enterprise App Modernization, Mobile App Development and Web Development.
What INMIND charges comes down to a handful of variables — how complex the project is, the number of development hours involved, the tech stack required, team size, and which engagement model you pick. Based on available data, INMIND's typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.
INMIND has delivered projects across a range of different industries, including Human Resources, Healthcare, Energy & Utilities, Fashion & Apparel, Food & Beverage and Education.
Generally, yes — companies like INMIND tend to work well with startups because of what they typically offer: MVP builds, product strategy input, architecture that can scale later, and dedicated teams that keep costs manageable while still moving fast. For context, it has experience across industries such as Human Resources, Healthcare, Energy & Utilities, Fashion & Apparel, Food & Beverage and Education, and it has been operating since 2008.
The exact stack shifts by project, but INMIND commonly works across things like React, Angular, Vue.js, Node.js, Python, .NET, Java, PHP, Flutter, React Native, native iOS and Android, and cloud platforms like AWS and Azure. For context, its listed capabilities span AR App Development, Enterprise App Modernization, Mobile App Development and Web Development, and it has been operating since 2008.
That depends on where INMIND is based and who they primarily serve — some firms like this operate fully offshore, some are local-first, and plenty run a hybrid model that mixes both. For context, its listed capabilities span AR App Development, Enterprise App Modernization, Mobile App Development and Web Development, and it reports a team size of 10 - 49 professionals.
Plenty of modern software teams, INMIND included, now build real AI and machine learning features — chatbots, predictive models, computer vision, and automation that goes beyond simple rule-based scripts. For context, its listed capabilities span AR App Development, Enterprise App Modernization, Mobile App Development and Web Development, and it reports a team size of 10 - 49 professionals.
Most professional shops, including INMIND, expect to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement before getting into specifics — it's a fairly standard ask and a reasonable one to make before sharing anything sensitive. For context, its listed capabilities span AR App Development, Enterprise App Modernization, Mobile App Development and Web Development, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.
It's a common line of work for a company like INMIND — multi-tenant architecture, subscription billing hooked up properly, and cloud-native deployment built for a product meant to scale as a service rather than a one-off build. For context, it has experience across industries such as Human Resources, Healthcare, Energy & Utilities, Fashion & Apparel, Food & Beverage and Education, and it reports a team size of 10 - 49 professionals.
