AppCraft
Overall Review Rating
4.8 (7 Ratings)
Services
- Cross Platform App Development
- Android App Development
- MySQL
- Cross Platform Development
- Logo Designing
- Cloud Computing Software
- Mobile App Development
- Chat Bots & AI Development
- iOS App Development
- Blockchain Development
- Web Development
- Machine Learning
Industries Served
AppCraft Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Elliot Thorne
Managing Director, Technology - Redwood Capital AdvisorsInfrastructure-as-code that our team uses as a reference example internally
What I appreciated most was that they were honest when things were not going to plan. There was one point mid-project where a dependency was going to affect our timeline and they told us three weeks before it would have become critical. That gave us time to adjust. Vendors who manage upward proactively are rare. This one did it consistently throughout the engagement.
Project summary
Our previous vendor had left us with a codebase that worked but was nearly impossible to extend. We needed to fix that without stopping delivery to the business.
Jia Hui Tan
VP of Engineering - RedDot Technologies Pte LtdConversion rate improved from the first week in production. Design decisions backed by data.
The knowledge transfer at the end of the project was notably good. Too many vendors see handover as a tick-box exercise. This team ran structured sessions, produced documentation our internal team actually references, and spent real time making sure we understood the architecture decisions well enough to maintain and extend the system independently. Six months later we are doing exactly that without needing to go back to them for every question.
Project summary
A new practice area required document management workflows that did not exist in our current system. We needed them in place before the first client matter opened.
Adriana Voss
Director of Platform Engineering - Cascadia Digital VenturesEvery milestone hit. Every commitment met. No excuses, just delivery.
We received proposals from six vendors. Four of them quoted us prices that bore no relationship to the actual scope. This team came back with something realistic and then delivered against it exactly. I have worked on enough technology projects to know that the gap between what is proposed and what is delivered is where trust gets destroyed. There was no gap here. What was promised is what we got, and the ongoing relationship we have built from this is something we intend to continue.
Project summary
Our campaign workflow ran across twelve different tools. The reconciliation overhead was hurting both speed and accuracy, and our team was absorbing the cost.
Rohan Desai
Senior Product Manager - Apex Retail Pvt LtdSales visibility we had requested for three years, delivered in fourteen weeks
What I appreciated most was that they were honest when things were not going to plan. There was one point mid-project where a dependency was going to affect our timeline and they told us three weeks before it would have become critical. That gave us time to adjust. Vendors who manage upward proactively are rare. This one did it consistently throughout the engagement.
Project summary
Our audience data sat in eight different tools with no shared identity. Personalisation was impossible without first solving that foundation problem.
Melissa Ortega
VP of Product - Brightline EdTech IncReal-time asset tracking that our ops team had been requesting for three years
Our stakeholder group was unusually broad — board sponsors, operational users, compliance leads, and an IT team with strong opinions. I have watched vendors handle that kind of environment badly. This team adjusted how they communicated depending on who they were talking to, managed expectations honestly when things shifted, and delivered something that each group considers a success. Getting everyone to agree on that outcome was not straightforward and they deserve credit for making it happen.
Project summary
Matter administration time had grown to the point where it was showing up in utilisation metrics. Every hour spent on systems was an hour not billed — the business case did not need modelling.