Software Interactive

BACKGROUND

Please describe your company and your position there.

I am a founder and CEO of the company. We are a team of experts operating on the border of the world of media and telecommunications. We use the latest, innovative technologies to build solutions for television broadcasters. We specialize in delivering high-quality professional (that is, commercially used) solutions in real-time TV streaming.

OPPORTUNITY / CHALLENGE

For what projects/services did your company hire Software Interactive, and what were your goals?

Being an expert in video streaming and actively participating in the market we noticed that the widely used communication channels for video transmissions (like satellites) have obvious cost disadvantage comparing to the transmission over Internet, while at the same time new methods and protocols are being developed regarding using Internet for such transmissions. Thus, we decided that it is time to utilize our knowledge of the domain and business contacts and prepare reliable solution for video streaming over IP protocol.

For this, we needed a company that could help us in researching, designing, and implementing software that would work fast and reliable and would adapt one of the available video protocols / frameworks. We knew that the main part of the solution had to be written in C++, and, as we do not have expertise in this technology, we hired Software Interactive.

SOLUTION

How did you select this vendor and what were the deciding factors?

We were looking for a software company that not only specializes in programing in C++, but also understands how bringing R&D projects to commercial use works. The vendor has been recommended to us by management of the local Innovation and Technological Cluster. During the initial meetings we received valuable technical and architectural guidelines from the vendor employees that proved that we should choose Software Interactive as a partner for this project.

Describe the scope of work in detail, including the project steps, key deliverables, and technologies used.

We started with designing of how the architecture of the system should look like. They gave me valuable input of how the things can be organized from their point of view – being lower-level implementation of the core elements of the system. They proposed the way of how engine and node elements should work and communicate. During implementation phase, vendor employees were constantly sharing their valuable insights of how to design elements of the system allowing me to choose a correct way to do so.

Also, they properly researched different mechanisms and tools available to be used in the system. Sometimes, it required very deep knowledge and enormous effort – for example, they were fixing and making significant changes in complex SRT protocol implementation. Finally, they were very flexible when meeting my business goals – they allowed me to rotate people hired from them depending on the current amount of work.

How many people from the vendor's team worked with you, and what were their positions?

6 people were involved in the project. 1 of them was their CTO / architect, and other were mid / senior C++ developers and architects.

RESULTS & FEEDBACK

Can you share any measurable outcomes of the project or general feedback about the deliverables?

The solution that we are preparing includes two completely new tools – streaming platform and playout platform. Both of these tools are already on the market with signed contracts with the clients and are working in production environment. This project allowed us, as a company, to make an entrance into new field / market.

Describe their project management style, including communication tools and timeliness.

We communicated on a daily basis – we had daily meetings on Zoom and planning meetings every 2 weeks. We were also meeting personally from time to time – whenever it was necessary to discuss and decide on the important aspects of the project. Vendor employees were constantly available for us in case of any questions etc. We have not noticed any communication issues during entire project.

What did you find most impressive or unique about this company?

I value their approach to meeting my goals, especially under cost pressure. It was not a simple task to do so as it was R&D project with many risks and difficult technical decisions to be made. Also, they are very good C++ developers.

Are there any areas for improvement or something they could have done differently?

I have a feeling that sometimes, especially at the beginning of the cooperation, when making technical decisions, their opinion was influenced by my point of view too much. Later, we learned to value our own ideas and to confront them.

BACKGROUND

Please describe your company and your position there.

Euvic as an Integrator 2.0 have over 20 locations in Poland and a few locations abroad. We based our capabilities on 5 business pillars: Software Development, IT Infrastructure, Innovations, Body/Team Leasing and Performance. I'm the HR Manager here.

OPPORTUNITY / CHALLENGE

For what projects/services did your company hire Software Interactive, and what were your goals?

Our company was creating software that required a module with complex computer vision algorithms to be implemented. We hired Software Interactive to design and implement those algorithms for us. The goal was to utilize the expertise in this area of Software Interactive company’s employees to fulfill needs of our clients.

SOLUTION

How did you select this vendor and what were the deciding factors?

We successfully cooperated with this vendor previously keeping it on the shortlist of companies to cooperate with, and also we knew that this vendor has unique experience with designing and delivering computer vision solutions.

Describe the scope of work in detail, including the project steps, key deliverables, and technologies used.

For each algorithm that was used in the solution, they started with analysing all the requirements and limitations that had to be satisfied. After that, they proposed up to several possible methods (including explanations of how these methods were chosen – usually based on the „state of the art” analysis and past experiences of the vendor) that could be used to obtain the final solution.

For each method, all the limitations, including time and cost estimates, were introduced. After that, the proofs of concept have been prepared, using methods that we both agree to. When the PoC confirmed that the chosen methods would work, they implemented the algorithms and integrated them with our software.

What we liked in such an approach was that the vendor used a mix of the management and technical skills – giving us options to choose a full spectrum of the approaches (including complex ones or very new methods in a given field), with full understanding of the cost and time limitations at the same time. Such approach also mitigated the risk of spending a significant amount of cash for a solution that won’t work.

How many people from the vendor's team worked with you, and what were their positions?

We cooperated with 6 people – 1 of them was their CTO being our main point of contact, but other developers were also in contact with us, including staying in our office for several workdays during integration phase.

RESULTS & FEEDBACK

Can you share any measurable outcomes of the project or general feedback about the deliverables?

Prepared algorithms allowed us to deliver final working solutions to our clients. One of the algorithms was especially innovative – allowed to prepare more general solution for the client that we thought was possible. It is related to the dewarping problem of panoramic cameras, the proposed solution allowed us to use any possible panoramic camera instead of 1 chosen.

Describe their project management style, including communication tools and timeliness.

We were communicating everyday – having an agile methodology daily meeting. We also introduced Slack for fast notifications and questions/answers. When necessary, the vendor's employees were visiting our office for onsite meetings. Overall, the communication was very good.

What did you find most impressive or unique about this company?

We highly valued their expertise in this particular area (Computer Vision and C++) and their common sense in the approach to the final solution.

Are there any areas for improvement or something they could have done differently?

Nothing I can think of.