Crashes, ANRs, slow starts, failed releases and APIs that time out under load are not fixed by guessing at a rewrite. I start with evidence: what is failing, on which devices, at which point in the flow, and what changed. Then we fix the highest-risk issues in a controlled order.
Flutter · Android · iOS · Laravel · Performance audits · Remote worldwide
The first step is an audit of the codebase, build setup, crash data, release history and the actual user flows that fail. I look for the difference between a product problem and an engineering problem: a confusing flow can look like a bug, and a bad API contract can look like a slow screen.
The output is a short, written list of risks with evidence, impact and a recommended order of work. That lets you decide whether to stabilise, rebuild a module or replace the product, rather than starting with the most expensive option.
Startup time, time to first meaningful screen, scroll jank, image and video loading, API latency and memory pressure are measurable. I record a baseline on named devices and network profiles, make one change at a time, and re-measure. Without a before/after on the same setup, performance work is just opinion.
I prioritise by user impact and risk: a crash on the checkout screen comes before a slightly slow settings page. The fix may be a small code change, a caching strategy, a database index or a release-process change.
A rescue is not finished when one bug disappears. The release pipeline should be repeatable, the crash queue should be visible, and the team should know which parts are fragile. I document the changes and the remaining risks, then either move into maintenance or hand over to your team.
If the app is a white-label build with unclear ownership, I can audit the licence, build and third-party accounts before touching the code. That avoids fixing a product you cannot legally or practically deploy.
Explore examples of mobile, Smart TV and integrated product work.
I can commit to a diagnosis, a written plan and a controlled implementation. I cannot guarantee that every issue is fixable within a fixed budget before I have seen the code and the failure evidence. If a problem requires a rewrite, I will say so.
No. A rewrite is the most expensive option and often the least certain. I recommend it only when the current code cannot be safely changed or the product direction has changed enough that incremental work is more expensive.
Yes, after an audit. Old dependencies can be upgraded or isolated, but the path depends on how far behind the framework and store requirements are. I will give you the options and the risks rather than a blanket promise.
Yes, if you need one. I can sign a mutual NDA before detailed repository or architecture access.
Yes, but I start with the licence, build and account audit described on the white-label page. I will not start a rebrand before ownership and deployment access are clear.
An initial audit usually takes a few days to a week, depending on access and complexity. The fix work is then scoped from the evidence. I do not promise a date before I know what is failing.
