NativApps
Overall Review Rating
4.5 (6 Ratings)
Services
- Cross Platform Development
- Automotive R&D
- Hyperledger
- Mobile App Development
- Mobile App Marketing
- Enterprise App Modernization
- Android App Development
- Digital Marketing
- AI Development
- iOS App Development
- Data Science & Big Data
- Web Development
Industries Served
NativApps Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Bilal Chaudhry
Co-Founder & CTO - Indus Software HouseEvery milestone hit. Every commitment met. No excuses, just delivery.
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 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.
Radosław Kowalczyk
Head of Development - Wisła Software Sp zooApp store debut with a 4.7 rating. The reviews write themselves when the product is good.
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
A new care pathway required patient data to move between systems in a way our current architecture did not support. The integration complexity was beyond what we could handle in-house.
Niamh O'Sullivan
Director of Product - Munster Digital LtdWent live on time and under budget. Our CFO framed the project charter.
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 licensing agreement required us to demonstrate GxP-compliant data management to a partner's satisfaction. Our existing infrastructure failed that assessment.
Imogen Tanner
Head of Engineering - Outback Data SolutionsThe outcome we needed, on the timeline we needed it, by people we would use again
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
The project had a board-level visibility date. We needed a partner who would treat the deadline as their own.
Zara Hussain
Head of Technology - Ravi Digital AgencyImplementation with the documentation and change management it deserved
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
Partner-level reporting required visibility into matter data that our current systems could not provide without significant manual extraction and aggregation.