Mobile App Dev for Music Streaming Company
- Custom Software Development Mobile App Development Web Development
- Confidential
- Jan. 2021 - May 2025
- Quality
- 0.5
- Schedule
- 0.5
- Cost
- 0.5
- Willing to Refer
- 0.5
"They should have prioritized building a technically sound and robust application from the outset."
- Arts, entertainment & music
- Portland, Oregon
- 1-10 Employees
- Online Review
- Verified
A music streaming company hired Idea Usher to develop a functional mobile app. The project aimed to focus on technical quality and architecture and conduct technical audits.
The client was disappointed with their experience with Idea Usher. The team failed to deliver a quality product and was unaccountable for technical issues. The client also witnessed a high level of unprofessionalism. In the end, the client had to walk away due to major technical failures. This review includes the service provider's response.
The client submitted this review online.
BACKGROUND
Please describe your company and position.
I am the COO of an arts, entertainment & music company
Describe what your company does in a single sentence.
Music streaming platform that focuses on the artist experience
OPPORTUNITY / CHALLENGE
What specific goals or objectives did you hire Idea Usher to accomplish?
- Complete a functional mobile application
SOLUTION
How did you find Idea Usher?
Online Search
Why did you select Idea Usher over others?
United States business presence
Describe the scope of work in detail. Please include a summary of key deliverables.
After 3 years and $20,000 invested into a music app with IdeaUsher, we were forced to walk away due to major technical failures and an unwillingness to take responsibility. A third-party audit confirmed serious structural flaws in the app they delivered — including improper architecture, memory leaks, and outdated practices.
When we requested a partial refund to resolve things professionally, we received a now-deleted message implying fake review retaliation — which we documented.
As a founder, I’m sharing this to help others avoid similar situations. Don’t ignore red flags, and always get everything in writing. If you’re considering IdeaUsher, ask the hard questions early and get your own audit before signing off on delivery.
RESULTS & FEEDBACK
What were the measurable outcomes from the project that demonstrate progress or success?
While the project with IdeaUsher ultimately failed due to major technical issues and a lack of accountability, there were measurable outcomes from my experience that demonstrate progress in terms of learning and avoiding future pitfalls.
Measurable Outcomes:
- $20,000 Investment Loss: This is a significant, quantifiable outcome representing the financial cost of the project's failure. It highlights the impact of the technical issues and the vendor's unwillingness to rectify them.
3 Years of Development Time Lost: This is a measure of the time investment that did not result in a functional product.
Third-Party Audit Findings: The audit provided concrete, measurable evidence of the technical failures, including:Confirmed Structural Flaws: This is a qualitative outcome, but the confirmation by a third party is a measurable step in understanding the project's issues.
Identified Improper Architecture: A specific technical deficiency that was identified and can be measured against best practices.
Identified Memory Leaks: A quantifiable technical issue that impacts performance.
Identified Outdated Practices: A measure of how current the development techniques were.
Documentation of Retaliation Threat: The documented, now-deleted message serves as measurable evidence of the vendor's unprofessional behavior and unwillingness to resolve the situation amicably.
Increased Due Diligence Practices: As a direct result of this experience, my approach to vendor selection and contract negotiation has become demonstrably more rigorous. This includes:Mandating independent audits before final sign-off: A new, measurable step in my process.
Ensuring all communication and agreements are in writing: A change in practice to ensure a clear record.
Asking more challenging and specific questions during the vetting process: While harder to quantify precisely, this represents a measurable improvement in my questioning strategy.
While these outcomes are not positive in the context of the project's success, they represent measurable progress in my understanding of vendor management, technical quality assessment, and risk mitigation. The experience, though costly, has yielded valuable lessons that will inform future endeavors and help prevent similar situations."
Describe their project management. Did they deliver items on time? How did they respond to your needs?
Based on my experience with IdeaUsher, their project management was severely lacking and ultimately contributed significantly to the project's failure.
Project Management:
- Delivery Timelines: There was no sense of reliable delivery on time. While initial phases might have shown some progress, the major technical failures indicate that critical elements were either not delivered correctly or were delivered with fundamental flaws that made them non-functional. The fact that after 3 years and $20,000 invested, the app was unusable due to technical issues is a clear indicator of a failure to deliver a usable product within a reasonable timeframe. The time and financial investment were effectively wasted due to the poor quality of the delivery.
Responsiveness to Needs: Their responsiveness to my needs was extremely poor, particularly when it came to addressing the critical technical issues. When the problems were identified, and even after a third-party audit confirmed serious flaws, there was a clear unwillingness to take responsibility. This demonstrates a fundamental failure to respond to the most significant need: a functional and technically sound product. Furthermore, my request for a partial refund to resolve the situation professionally was met with a now-deleted message implying fake review retaliation. This is not only unprofessional but a clear indication of a complete lack of responsiveness to a reasonable request for resolution.
In summary, their project management was characterized by a failure to deliver a quality product, a lack of accountability for technical issues, and a completely unprofessional and unhelpful response to my attempts to resolve the situation.
What was your primary form of communication with Idea Usher?
- Virtual Meeting
- Email or Messaging App
What did you find most impressive or unique about this company?
Based on my experience with IdeaUsher, what I found most... unique and, in a way, unfortunately impressive was their ability to deliver a product with such significant and fundamental technical flaws that were only revealed through a third-party audit, despite a lengthy development period and substantial investment.
While this is clearly not impressive in a positive sense, it's unique in the severity and nature of the issues. The fact that serious structural flaws like improper architecture, memory leaks, and outdated practices were present after 3 years and $20,000 invested is, frankly, astonishing and a level of technical failure I had not previously encountered to this degree.
Another aspect that was uniquely unimpressive, but noteworthy in its sheer unprofessionalism, was their response to the issues and my attempt at a professional resolution. The now-deleted message implying fake review retaliation was a truly unique and shocking level of unprofessionalism that I had not expected from a development company.
So, while I can't point to anything positive that was impressive, the sheer scale of the technical failure and the uniquely unprofessional response were certainly noteworthy and, unfortunately, memorable aspects of my experience with IdeaUsher.
Are there any areas for improvement or something Idea Usher could have done differently?
Based on my experience, there are significant areas for improvement for IdeaUsher, and numerous things they could have done differently to avoid the project's disastrous outcome and the negative experience I had.
Key Areas for Improvement and What They Could Have Done Differently:
- Improve Technical Quality and Architecture: This is the most critical area. They should have prioritized building a technically sound and robust application from the outset. They could have done this differently by:Employing more experienced and competent developers who understand best practices and modern architecture.
Implementing rigorous internal quality control and code reviews to catch fundamental flaws early in the development process.
Conducting thorough technical audits before delivering major milestones to identify and rectify issues proactively, rather than leaving it to the client to discover them through a third party.
Enhance Project Management and Communication: Their project management was clearly inadequate. They could have improved by:Establishing clear and realistic timelines and communicating any potential delays transparently and proactively.
Providing regular and meaningful updates on technical progress and any challenges encountered.
Company Responses
The service provider responded on May 27, 2025.
We’d like to clarify some major inaccuracies in this review, which we believe is misleading and unfair.
This project started in early 2022 and included four parts: a mobile and web app for both users and artists. All work was completed and approved by the client within 6–7 months. The final payment was made in September 2022 after full delivery.
Later, the client asked us to add more features. During this time, their app was rejected by the App Store due to copyright issues—something not caused by our development. Even though app publishing wasn’t part of our original contract, we still helped until it was accepted.
After launch, the client chose not to continue with our maintenance plan. Over time, some parts of the app became outdated, which is normal when updates aren’t made. When the client returned years later, they shared a third-party audit. But many of the issues were based on old links and outdated code, which no longer applied. We still tried to help, even though this was beyond our original agreement.
The client missed many meetings and changed plans often, which delayed progress. Still, we stayed professional and did our best to support them.
Originally, we offered a white-label product, but the client requested a fully customized version. We delivered it exactly as asked.
After using the product for over two years, the client is now asking for a refund and making threats. We have full records of all work and communication, and we’re happy to share this for review.
We’ve successfully delivered many projects in over 11 years of business, and this experience does not reflect how we normally work with clients.
RATINGS
-
Quality
0.5Service & Deliverables
"As described in my review, I have to now hire another company to fix these problems."
-
Schedule
0.5On time / deadlines
"Deadlines were never met on time."
-
Cost
0.5Value / within estimates
-
Willing to Refer
0.5NPS