topappdevelopmentcompanies
Write a Review menu
Menu

Overall Review Rating

4.1 (7 Ratings)

Quality 4.1/5
Schedule 4.1/5
Cost 4.0/5
Communication 4.3/5

Services

  • Android App Development
  • iOS App Development
  • DevOps
  • Mobile App Development
  • MySQL
  • Cross Platform Development
  • Logo Designing
  • Mobile App Marketing
  • Cloud Provisioning Services
  • Drupal
  • Web Development
  • Automotive R&D

Industries Served

Financial Services Food & Beverage Nonprofit & NGO Real Estate Telecommunications

Micra Solution Reviews

Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.

Fiona MacPherson

Operations Director - Highland Analytics Ltd
Posted on Apr 12, 2026
4.0 Overall Rating

CRM that connects marketing automation to revenue data seamlessly at last

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 regulatory change required us to rearchitect how we stored and processed customer call data. The timeline was set externally, not by our roadmap preferences.

Quality 3.5/5
Schedule 4.0/5
Cost 3.5/5
Communication 4.5/5
project type
Project Type CRM Development
industry
Industry Telecommunications
project cost
Project Cost $10,000 to $49,999
Read Full Review

Victoria Haines

Chief Product Officer - Solaris Media Group
Posted on Nov 21, 2025
4.5 Overall Rating

Pen test found things our previous vendor had missed for two consecutive years

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

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.

Quality 5.0/5
Schedule 5.0/5
Cost 4.0/5
Communication 4.5/5
project type
Project Type Cybersecurity
industry
Industry Food & Beverage
project cost
Project Cost Less than $10,000
Read Full Review

Liselotte Bakker

Head of Platform Engineering - Harbour Digital BV
Posted on Oct 12, 2025
4.0 Overall Rating

A development partner who pushed back when our approach was wrong — exactly what we needed

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

The business case had been approved but the internal resource to execute it had not materialised. External delivery was the pragmatic solution.

Quality 4.5/5
Schedule 4.5/5
Cost 4.5/5
Communication 4.5/5
project type
Project Type Software Development
industry
Industry Food & Beverage
project cost
Project Cost $500,000+
Read Full Review

Tobias Lindemann

Leiter Digitalisierung - Lindemann Industrie GmbH
Posted on Apr 05, 2025
4.0 Overall Rating

They understood the difference between AI that demos well and AI that runs in prod

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

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.

Quality 4.0/5
Schedule 4.0/5
Cost 4.0/5
Communication 4.0/5
project type
Project Type AI & Machine Learning
industry
Industry Food & Beverage
project cost
Project Cost $500,000+
Read Full Review

Nathan Prescott

VP of Technology - Ironclad Insurance Group
Posted on Jan 31, 2025
4.0 Overall Rating

Finance and operations finally working from the same numbers. That alone was worth it.

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 agents were managing data across four disconnected systems. The time they spent on reconciliation was time not spent with clients. The ROI case for consolidation was obvious.

Quality 3.5/5
Schedule 3.5/5
Cost 4.5/5
Communication 4.5/5
project type
Project Type ERP Development
industry
Industry Real Estate
project cost
Project Cost $50,000 to $149,999
Read Full Review
back to top