Softpers Interactive
Overall Review Rating
4.3 (6 Ratings)
Services
- Mobile App Development
- Mobile App Marketing
- Cross Platform Development
- Web Development
- Data Science & Big Data
- Internet Marketing
- Advertising, Media
- Content Management System
- Android App Development
- PhoneGap App Development
- iOS App Development
- Logo Designing
Industries Served
Softpers Interactive Reviews
Have a look at these client reviews on previously delivered projects.
Tariq Al-Harbi
Director of Technology - Saudi Cloud HoldingsPredictive models that changed how we plan. We would not go back.
The technical quality is the obvious thing to highlight. The automated test suite is comprehensive, the deployment pipeline is solid, and the documentation is actually useful rather than written to satisfy a checklist. But the metric I keep coming back to is what has NOT happened since go-live. No 2am incident calls. No emergency patches. No post-launch retrospectives about what went wrong. For a system of this complexity, that outcome is exactly what we paid for.
Project summary
A licensing agreement required us to demonstrate GxP-compliant data management to a partner's satisfaction. Our existing infrastructure failed that assessment.
Liselotte Bakker
Head of Platform Engineering - Harbour Digital BVReal-time asset tracking that our ops team had been requesting for three years
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
Our connected vehicle platform was accumulating telemetry data from a growing EV fleet with no clean way to act on it. We needed both the infrastructure and the analytics layer.
Melissa Ortega
VP of Product - Brightline EdTech IncEvery SEO ranking preserved from the old site. Our search team was very relieved.
Our stakeholder group was unusually broad — board sponsors, operational users, compliance leads, and an IT team with strong opinions. I have watched vendors handle that kind of environment badly. This team adjusted how they communicated depending on who they were talking to, managed expectations honestly when things shifted, and delivered something that each group considers a success. Getting everyone to agree on that outcome was not straightforward and they deserve credit for making it happen.
Project summary
Our actuarial models had outgrown the reporting infrastructure feeding them. Data latency was introducing risk into pricing decisions at a rate the business would no longer accept.
Niamh O'Sullivan
Director of Product - Munster Digital LtdWebsite went from liability to lead driver within 90 days of launch
Honestly, I came into this engagement with some scepticism. We had a bad experience with a vendor twelve months earlier and I wanted to see evidence of competence, not just hear about it. The discovery documentation was the first signal. The sprint delivery consistency was the second. By go-live I had stopped being sceptical and started planning how to expand the engagement. The production system has been stable from day one and our internal team loves working with the codebase they left us.
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.
Eoghan Fitzgerald
VP of Engineering - Shannon Tech Solutions LtdInfrastructure-as-code that our team uses as a reference example internally
The technical quality is the obvious thing to highlight. The automated test suite is comprehensive, the deployment pipeline is solid, and the documentation is actually useful rather than written to satisfy a checklist. But the metric I keep coming back to is what has NOT happened since go-live. No 2am incident calls. No emergency patches. No post-launch retrospectives about what went wrong. For a system of this complexity, that outcome is exactly what we paid for.
Project summary
We were losing deals to competitors whose platforms offered capabilities ours simply could not match. A targeted technology investment was the agreed response.