Automated tests are brilliant at what they do. But they can't tell you when something just feels wrong—when a button is technically functional but positioned where nobody would think to click it.
We run through your software the way actual humans would. That means clicking things in weird orders, trying to break workflows, and generally approaching your product like someone who hasn't read the documentation. Because let's face it, most users haven't.
There's a special kind of frustration that comes with bugs that only appear in production. Or ones that happen randomly. Or the absolute worst—bugs that you can't reproduce but users keep reporting.
We've spent enough time in debuggers to know that most problems have patterns, even when they seem random. Sometimes it takes fresh eyes. Sometimes it takes systematic elimination of possibilities. And yes, sometimes it takes admitting the problem is actually in a completely different part of the codebase than you thought.
You're about to release something new. We run through it systematically, document what we find, and help prioritize what needs fixing before launch versus what can wait. No drama, just clear information about where the risks are.
Regular testing cycles that fit into your development rhythm. We test new features, make sure recent changes didn't break existing functionality, and keep an eye on the overall experience. Think of it as maintenance, but for quality instead of infrastructure.
Something broke and you need help figuring out what. We dive in, trace the problem back to its source, and work with your team to get things stable again. These situations aren't fun for anyone, but they're a lot less stressful with someone who knows how to isolate issues quickly.
When different systems need to talk to each other, the connections between them become new places for things to go wrong. We test those handoff points, verify data flows correctly, and check that errors get handled properly when services are unavailable.
Moving to new infrastructure or refactoring code? We verify that behavior stays consistent even when the underlying implementation changes. It's tedious work, but finding regressions after migration is worse.
We're not security specialists, but we know the common vulnerabilities worth checking for. SQL injection, XSS, exposed credentials, that sort of thing. If we spot something concerning, we'll flag it and suggest you bring in security experts for a deeper review.
We'd been chasing a memory leak for two weeks. Our own testing kept missing it because it only happened under specific load conditions. igniteonmaxon found it in three days—turned out we had a subscription cleanup issue in a service we barely touched. Their systematic approach saved us from shipping something that would have caused real problems at scale.
Stellan Bergquist
Development Manager, Brisbane-based SaaS Company
Whether you're preparing for a launch, dealing with persistent bugs, or just want another set of eyes on your software—we're available for projects starting in late 2025 and into 2026.
Get in Touch