Attractor Software LLC
Overall Review Rating
4.5 (7 Ratings)
Services
- Web Development
- Cross Platform Development
- Chat Bots & AI Development
- ICO consulting Blockchain Implementation
- CMS Solutions
- AR App Development
- Mobile App Development
- Mobile App Marketing
- Cryptocurrency Wallet Development
- Branding
- Android App Development
- iOS App Development
Industries Served
Attractor Software LLC Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Jia Hui Tan
VP of Engineering - RedDot Technologies Pte LtdProposal matched the outcome. That alignment is rarer than vendors acknowledge.
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
Telehealth demand had turned a pilot into a core service line faster than our technology could keep up. We needed a compliant, reliable platform and we needed it quickly.
Tariq Al-Harbi
Director of Technology - Saudi Cloud HoldingsAccessibility improvements that broadened our audience and satisfied our enterprise clients
The part of this project I had been most worried about was the integration work. Our system landscape is complex, some of the upstream APIs were barely documented, and one of our third-party vendors was notoriously slow to respond. This team documented what the upstream vendors could not, built resilience into the architecture where third-party reliability was uncertain, and delivered integrations that have worked exactly as specified since day one. I genuinely could not have asked for more.
Project summary
Our audience data sat in eight different tools with no shared identity. Personalisation was impossible without first solving that foundation problem.
Callum Parata
CTO - Kiwi Cloud Solutions LtdWent live on time and under budget. Our CFO framed the project charter.
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 clinic management system and patient app had never integrated cleanly. The manual workaround had become a daily operational burden that the engineering team had run out of ways to patch.
Ji-Woo Park
VP of Engineering - Seoul Digital CorpCheckout completion rate improved from day one of production. Not week three — day one.
I have been through several technology implementations in my career. The pattern I am used to is: detailed proposal, optimistic timeline, scope creep, overrun, excuses at the end. This engagement broke that pattern at every stage. The timeline was realistic from the start. Changes were managed through process. The final delivery matched what was agreed. Simple, but uncommon.
Project summary
Our actuarial models had outgrown the reporting infrastructure feeding them. Data latency was introducing risk into pricing decisions at a rate the business would no longer accept.
Cameron Aldrich
Head of Digital Operations - Northstar Logistics CorpA development partner who pushed back when our approach was wrong — exactly what we needed
The platform has been live for six months and is handling three times the transaction volume we scoped for. That is not because we underestimated — it is because the architecture choices made during discovery were genuinely forward-thinking. Most vendors design for exactly what you tell them. This team designed for what you are likely to need. We are already scoping the next phase and there was no question about who we would use.
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.