Hands In Technology
Overall Review Rating
4.1 (5 Ratings)
Services
- Logo Designing
- Cryptocurrency Wallet Development
- Business Analysis & Consulting
- Web Development
- CRM Development
- Mobile App Marketing
- Android App Development
- App Marketing
- Mobile App Development
- Digital Strategy
- iOS App Development
- Cross Platform Development
Industries Served
Hands In Technology Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Erik Lindqvist
Chief Technology Officer - Nordic Cloud ABBlind spots in our operational data are gone. The ROI case wrote itself.
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 internal team was committed to maintenance and could not absorb a new build of this complexity. An external partner was the only way to hit the timeline.
Declan Hartley
Chief Digital Officer - Southern Cross TechnologyE-commerce rebuild that generated positive ROI before the end of its first quarter live
The technical quality is the obvious thing to highlight. The automated test suite is comprehensive, the deployment pipeline is solid, and the documentation is actually useful rather than written to satisfy a checklist. But the metric I keep coming back to is what has NOT happened since go-live. No 2am incident calls. No emergency patches. No post-launch retrospectives about what went wrong. For a system of this complexity, that outcome is exactly what we paid for.
Project summary
Our mobile app sat at 2.9 stars. Every negative review mentioned the same two things — speed and checkout complexity. Both were fixable with the right engineering approach.
Yuki Hashimoto
Head of Product Development - East Asia Commerce KKEnd-to-end testing that our development team now considers a productivity asset
We have worked with a few agencies over the years and the comparison is honestly not close. What stood out from the start was that they spent serious time understanding the problem before they proposed anything. Once development started, every sprint review was clean — no hidden surprises, no slipped milestones. The production system has been running for four months without a single critical issue. Our internal developers reviewed the codebase at handover and were genuinely complimentary about the quality. That does not happen often.
Project summary
Expanding to a second clinic location exposed how much of our current platform assumed a single-site model. We needed an architectural overhaul before scaling further.
Julien Moreau
Co-Founder & CTO - TechLyon SASConversion rate improved from the first week in production. Design decisions backed by data.
The technical quality is the obvious thing to highlight. The automated test suite is comprehensive, the deployment pipeline is solid, and the documentation is actually useful rather than written to satisfy a checklist. But the metric I keep coming back to is what has NOT happened since go-live. No 2am incident calls. No emergency patches. No post-launch retrospectives about what went wrong. For a system of this complexity, that outcome is exactly what we paid for.
Project summary
A new commercial property division required tooling that was fundamentally different from our residential platform. Extending the existing system was not viable.
Gustavo Ferreira
VP of Technology - Amazônia Digital LtdaOur executives now open the dashboard before their email. That is adoption.
What set this team apart in practice was their engineering judgment — specifically, their willingness to tell us when our requirements were wrong and explain what to do instead. Not every vendor does that. The consultative element elevated the final output well beyond what our original brief described. We ended up with something better than what we had asked for, which is not a sentence I expected to be writing in a review.
Project summary
Our product thinking was strong. Our execution capacity in this specific domain was limited. We needed deep expertise, not a generalist willing to learn on our time.