Planet Argon
Overall Review Rating
4.6 (7 Ratings)
Overview
Planet Argon specializes in developing, designing, and reimagining complex web applications for established companies. They specialize in one thing they handle your Ruby on Rails application so you can meet your business goals. They want your apps to have the best quality possible and in order to do that, they have to know your enterprise inside out.
Services
- MVP Development
- Internet Marketing
- Cloud Computing Software
- Content Marketing
- iOS App Development
- Mobile App Development
- Android App Development
- PHP Development
- ERP Development
- Web Development
- Cloud Solutions
- Cross Platform Development
Industries Served
Planet Argon Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Vikram Srinivasan
Head of Platform - Cascade EdTech SolutionsWebsite went from liability to lead driver within 90 days of launch
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 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.
Fatima Al-Suwaidi
Head of Digital Strategy - Gulf FinTech HoldingsOutperformed our in-house team on every SLA we tracked from month one
Looking back, what strikes me most is how little drama there was. Real technology projects have problems. This one had them too — but every problem was flagged before it became a crisis, every scope change was handled through a proper process, and every risk was managed rather than buried. Our project manager said it was the smoothest vendor engagement he had been involved in. Given how complex the technical requirements were, I think that reflects genuine delivery maturity.
Project summary
The project had a board-level visibility date. We needed a partner who would treat the deadline as their own.
Nora Al-Otaibi
VP of Engineering - Salam Digital SolutionsPredictive models that changed how we plan. We would not go back.
We handed them an aggressive deadline, a complex scope, and a client-side team that was stretched and not always available when they needed us. They handled that gracefully. They were precise about what they needed and when they needed it. Where they could proceed independently they did. The delivery landed on time in spite of the constraints we added. I regard that as strong evidence of genuine professional maturity — not just capability.
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.
Lars Pfeiffer
VP of Technology - NordTech Logistik GmbHCloud architecture built properly the first time. We did not have to go back and fix it.
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
As a technology company ourselves we hold our vendors to the same standard our clients hold us to. Finding a partner who could meet that bar without being hand-held through the process was the challenge.
Yuki Hashimoto
Head of Product Development - East Asia Commerce KKImplementation with the documentation and change management it deserved
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
First notice of loss was averaging three days. The market benchmark was under four hours. Automating intake and triage was the agreed priority for the year.