So Technologies
Overall Review Rating
4.1 (6 Ratings)
Services
- Cloud Computing Software
- Mobile App Development
- Custom Software Development
- iOS App Development
- Web Development
- Hyperledger
- Ethereum Blockchain
- Digital Marketing
- Cloud Provisioning Services
- Android App Development
- Machine Learning
- Cross Platform Development
Industries Served
So Technologies Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Declan Hartley
Chief Digital Officer - Southern Cross TechnologyInfrastructure spend down by a third. Same performance, better architecture.
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
Telehealth demand had turned a pilot into a core service line faster than our technology could keep up. We needed a compliant, reliable platform and we needed it quickly.
Lachlan Vickers
Co-Founder - Ironbark Software Pty LtdRebuilt from the ground up. Launched on time. Zero regression issues.
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
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.
Ryan Calloway
Founder & CTO - Apex Digital Media LLCThe advice held up six months later when circumstances changed. That is good consulting.
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
The project had a board-level visibility date. We needed a partner who would treat the deadline as their own.
Marcin Lewandowski
Engineering Manager - Kraków Digital Sp zooBlack Friday traffic spike was the real test. The platform passed without a sweat.
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 business case had been approved but the internal resource to execute it had not materialised. External delivery was the pragmatic solution.
Derek Watts
Director of Operations - Stonebridge Capital LLCProposal matched the outcome. That alignment is rarer than vendors acknowledge.
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
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.