At design time
Cost ×1. It is enough to change a line in the requirements before work starts.
Five kinds of testing. Each answers its own question: does it work, will it hold up, is it understandable and is it secure.
We walk the scenarios the way a user does: place an order, pay, return it, change details. We separately look at the edge cases where things break most often.
We simulate peak traffic and find the point where the system starts to degrade. Knowing your ceiling in advance is cheaper than discovering it on Black Friday.
Automated tests for the key scenarios, run before every update. They remove manual regression testing and the fear of shipping changes.
Testing on real devices with real people: where users get stuck, what they cannot find and why they abandon the cart.
Finding vulnerabilities before release: injections, broken access control, data leaking into responses and logs, and weak authentication.
The same bug costs differently depending on when it is found. That is the main argument for testing as a process rather than a one-off service before handover.
Cost ×1. It is enough to change a line in the requirements before work starts.
Cost ×3. The developer fixes the code before it reaches the build.
Cost ×10. The task goes back to the developer and the cycle starts again.
Cost ×30. An urgent hotfix outside the normal release schedule is required.
Cost ×100. On top of the fix cost come lost revenue and reputation.
Automated tests pay off not on the first run but on the twentieth. So it makes sense to automate stable scenarios that are checked before every release. Automating something that changes every week is a way to spend the budget on maintaining the tests themselves.
The result is not a list saying everything is bad but reproducible defects with priorities a developer can start on immediately.
We study the scenarios, the audience and what matters most for the business. Testing everything with equal rigour makes no sense.
We record what is tested and on which devices and browsers. The plan is agreed with you and also defines the scope and the price.
Every defect comes with reproduction steps, a screenshot and a priority. Without that a report is useless to the development team.
After fixes we check not only the defect itself but also that nothing nearby has broken.
They do, but they check that what they wrote works as intended. A dedicated tester checks something else: what happens if you do not do it as intended. These are different roles, and combining them in one person works badly because the eye gets used to the work.
Yes, this is a common request before accepting a contractor work. We have no interest in hiding defects, so the report is genuinely independent. It is better to order such a review before signing the acceptance certificate, not after.
It is decided from your analytics, not from a generic list. Usually it is two or three mobile resolutions and three browsers covering more than ninety percent of visitors. Testing everything is expensive and does not pay off.
Three numbers: how many concurrent users the system handles comfortably, where slowdown begins and what exactly is the limit, whether processor, disk, database or code. With that you can decide knowingly whether to add resources or optimise.
Tell us what needs testing and by when. We will draw up a test plan and quote based on the number of scenarios.
Request received
We can already see it. We will reply within one business day, and for urgent matters we will bring in the on-duty engineer right away.
City not found. Please check the spelling.