Irvine Software Company
Overall Review Rating
4.3 (8 Ratings)
Overview
Irvine Software Company is a leading mobile app development company specializing in web and application development, providing solutions to small businesses over the globe. They believe the key to the best business relationships is a thorough understanding of their customers’ requirement, priorities, and expectations. They think the key to the best business relationships is a total understanding of their customers’ needs, priorities, and expectations.
Services
- Advertising, Media
- Business Analysis & Consulting
- Android App Development
- Ethereum Blockchain
- Web Development
- CMS Solutions
- Mobile App Development
- MongoDB Development
- Cross Platform Development
- PHP Development
- iOS App Development
- Market Research
Industries Served
Irvine Software Company Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Ananya Sharma
Engineering Manager - BlueMind Analytics Pvt LtdTechnically strong, commercially fair, and genuinely good to work with
We went with a smaller team than we had originally planned for. I had concerns about whether the capacity would be sufficient given our timeline. Those concerns were unfounded. The team was focused, communication was constant, and the quality at each milestone review was consistent throughout. Smaller does not mean slower when the people are the right ones and this engagement proved that.
Project summary
A failed engagement the previous year had made us more rigorous about vendor selection. We took the time to find a partner we actually trusted before we committed.
Hyun-Su Lim
Director of Platform - Hanam Tech SolutionsSeven legacy systems replaced. One consolidated data model. Genuinely transformative.
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
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.
Marcus Holloway
SVP of Engineering - Vertex Cloud DynamicsUser research surfaced friction points we had stopped noticing. Eye-opening.
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
Partner-level reporting required visibility into matter data that our current systems could not provide without significant manual extraction and aggregation.
Imogen Tanner
Head of Engineering - Outback Data SolutionsOur executives now open the dashboard before their email. That is adoption.
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
Track-and-trace had gone from differentiator to baseline expectation in our client contracts. Our platform had neither and the gap was showing up in tender evaluations.
Flynn Buchanan
GM of Technology - Pacific Rim Commerce GroupA DevOps engagement that changed both the tooling and the culture
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
Clinical trial data management was running on a system that had been extended well past its design intent. Quality risks in that context are not acceptable — we needed a proper rebuild.