Lickability - AI/ML Development

Specialist firms are easier to assess because the claim is narrow. Lickability builds applications for Apple platforms and has done since 2009, with clients including a major magazine and well-known technology companies. It publishes its rates openly, which is rare enough in this directory to be worth noting on its own.

What They Actually Do

The firm has built for Apple platforms since the early days of the app ecosystem.

Engagements range from full products to targeted engineering advice.

The firm sells depth in one platform rather than breadth.

The firm designs and builds applications for Apple devices, with design and engineering consulting alongside. Documented work includes optimisation of an existing application, prototypes scoping engineering problems, and full product builds.

One documented engagement reduced a client’s development process by thirty to forty percent, producing direct cost savings rather than new features.

Services on Offer

• Apple platform development — Deep specialism rather than a listed capability.
• Engineering consulting — Reviewing existing code and processes to improve them.
• Prototyping — Scoping work before committing to a build.
• Interface and experience design — Design delivered alongside engineering.
• Application maintenance — Weekly rates offered for ongoing support.
• Published pricing — Rate ranges stated openly on the firm’s own site.
• Immersive and AI work — Listed alongside the core platform practice.

Where They Fit Best

Organisations whose customers are concentrated on Apple devices fit the specialism.

Buyers wanting an engineering opinion before committing fit the consulting option.

Teams needing an existing application improved fit as well as those building new.

Companies building serious Apple platform products fit the specialism. Documented clients span media, technology, and consumer applications.

The firm publishes its own guidance: fully featured applications typically exceed a hundred thousand dollars, smaller scoped projects fall between fifty and a hundred thousand, and design-only work costs less.

Tradeoffs Worth Knowing

The firm is small and fully remote. Buyers wanting an office to visit should factor that in.

Documented projects concentrate on one platform family.

Specialists are the right choice or the wrong one. Establish platform fit before discussing anything else.

The firm states plainly that it charges rates equal to its expertise. That is honest positioning and it rules out budget-constrained buyers.

The specialism is the whole proposition. If your product needs Android or web work, this is the wrong firm and they would likely say so.

The firm is fully remote with a four-day working week and stated hours of Monday to Thursday. That suits some buyers and constrains others, so confirm availability matches your needs.

The review base sits around twenty-five entries accumulated since 2009, which is modest for the operating history.

Most promotional coverage is published on the firm’s own blog, transparent about authorship and still marketing.

Practical Notes

Ask what happens if your project needs work outside their platform.

Confirm whether ongoing maintenance is retained or ad hoc.

Ask how quickly they can start, given the small team size.

Confirm whether backend work is included or arranged separately.

The firm has operated since 2009 and works fully remotely across the United States.

Documented clients include major media and technology organisations.

Most staff are reported around the New York area despite the remote model.

One client describes the firm independently designing, launching, and iterating on an application.

Another reports daily asynchronous updates with delivery on time and budget.

The firm is described by one client as among the strongest in its platform community.

Confirm the four-day week suits your project rhythm.

Use the published rate guidance to check budget fit before enquiring.

Ask whether consulting or full build suits your situation.

Agree maintenance arrangements if the application will need ongoing work.

Ask about app store submission and review handling.

Confirm design assets transfer in editable form.

Agree what counts as a defect versus a change.

Check analytics setup before launch.

How They Compare

The firm has operated since 2009, which is long for a specialist studio and implies repeat business.

Documented outcomes include process improvements rather than features alone, which is unusual and valuable.

Publishing rates openly is rare in this directory and saves both sides a wasted conversation.

The engineering consulting line suits buyers whose problem is an existing codebase rather than a missing product.

Against generalist agencies, the platform depth is genuine and narrow. Against offshore providers, rates are far higher and the expertise is scarce. Against hiring internally, a specialist firm brings experience immediately without recruitment. For a product where Apple platform quality decides adoption, the focus is the argument.

What to Verify Before Choosing Lickability

• Whether the four-day week suits your timeline
• Budget fit against published rate guidance
• Whether consulting or full build applies
• Maintenance arrangements and weekly rates
• Team composition assigned to your project
• Code ownership and handover terms
• Whether other platforms are needed later
• Testing scope across device generations
• Timeline commitments and slippage terms
• Support arrangements after launch