Updated
React appears in our published work on TrendinChat, YouNet and Reveal Software. Those cases describe product scope and interface delivery, not a count of products guaranteed to remain live. Bring the screens, state changes and existing application boundaries that a new interface must support.
Choosing React is not an architecture decision on its own. The decisions that matter happen in state management, in the data fetching layer and at your component boundaries. This page is about those decisions rather than the library itself.
Reveal’s case describes connected web, browser-extension and administration surfaces for users, roles and activity. YouNet’s case documents a configurable embedded chat widget with streamed responses and user controls. For a similar interface, map which actions change the screen and how loading, error and cancellation states should behave; the cases do not establish a particular internal state-management implementation.
React is a view library. Routing, data fetching, caching and form validation are all still your call. Teams get into trouble when they pick React and then postpone those four decisions until the codebase has grown around the gap. If you need server-side rendering rather than a single-page app, we point you at Next.js. If you need a content-heavy site, we point you at something lighter. Not every interface needs React, and saying so early saves money later.
TrendinChat’s published scope is topic-based real-time chat using React, React Native, Supabase and WebSockets. It does not document thousands of simultaneous participants, message-list virtualization or event batching. For a new real-time screen, define representative message volumes, reconnection behaviour and interaction checks, then measure the actual implementation.
Assess the existing interface, dependencies and available checks before deciding what to replace. Agree the affected workflow, acceptance criteria and release responsibilities for a bounded change. Agent-assisted inventory or refactoring can be part of the work, but it does not establish a universal speed saving.
Senior engineers building your product with AI coding agents: web, mobile, SaaS or browser extension, reviewed before anything ships.
AI-accelerated development, billed monthly. We confirm scope, capacity and start date in writing before checkout.
Compare the required public content, account workflows, routing and publishing with the existing application. Decide what the frontend must do and how it will be operated before choosing the framework. Search traffic alone does not settle that choice.
Yes, most of our partnerships start that way. We review the codebase first and produce a written assessment before proposing any work. Work runs as AI-accelerated development, starting from $2,000 per month, with scope agreed in writing.
Yes, we run interface design and development together. If you already have designs ready we can pick up from there, which shortens both scope and timeline. Either way, design decisions get reviewed alongside the code.
We generate a large share of the test coverage with AI assistance, but an engineer decides which behaviour is worth testing and whether the test verifies anything real. A test that passes without asserting anything useful is worse than no test.
One paragraph on what you are building, roughly when you need it, and who it is for. No brief, no form with fifteen fields.
From the engineer who would do the work, not a sales team. If we are not the right fit we say so, and where possible we point you somewhere better.
Scope, price and timeline in writing before anything is committed. You decide with the numbers in front of you.
No long contract to begin, no lock-in to our tooling, and the code is yours from the first commit.
Start a conversationA short note about the product, the timeline and who it is for is enough to start. You will hear back from the engineer who would do the work, not a sales team.
Ankara / Türkiye · Working across European and US time zones
