What is the difference between hiring iOS developers through you and commissioning an iOS development project?
They are different engagements, and the difference is who owns delivery. On an iOS development project we take a defined scope, run it with our own process and our own lead, and are accountable for the result. With augmentation you own delivery: the engineer works inside your process, your leads direct the work, and your definition of done applies. Augmentation is the better fit when you have engineering management to spare and a clear backlog. A delivered project is the better fit when you do not, because adding people to an unclear process makes it less clear, not more.
Who interviews and approves the engineer?
You do. Candidates are screened for your specific stack and your specific work, then assessed technically before you see them. You interview whoever you want, for as long as you want, and nobody joins your team without your sign-off. Rejecting a shortlist is a normal outcome, not a problem, and it means we go back and look again rather than pressing the case.
What happens if the engineer is not the right fit or leaves?
Sourcing the replacement and covering the handover is our responsibility, not yours. That is a substantial part of what you are paying for compared with contracting an individual directly, and it is the risk most people underestimate when they compare the two on rate alone. We also agree a fit checkpoint in the first month, because a replacement at week four is an inconvenience while the same conversation at month six is a serious problem.
What does it cost?
We do not publish a rate, and a firm number quoted before we understand the role would not be reliable enough for you to plan against. Cost depends on seniority, the specific skill mix, the expected duration, and how much overlap with your working hours the role requires. We give you a figure after scoping the role against your actual backlog rather than against a job title.
How quickly can someone start?
We will not quote a standard number of days. Time to start depends on how specific the skill requirement is, how many interview rounds you run, and notice periods where a candidate is currently employed. A partner promising a fixed turnaround before seeing the role is either guessing or planning to put forward whoever is available rather than whoever fits.
What level of iOS experience do the engineers have?
We do not publish a seniority distribution or claim a bench of engineers waiting. Experience is assessed against your specific role: an app that mainly needs sustained maintenance calls for different strengths than one pushing into background processing or a complex widget surface. We tell you where a candidate is weaker as well as where they are strong, because a shortlist with no stated weaknesses is a sales document rather than an assessment.
Do the engineers work in our time zone?
Our engineers are in Vietnam, which gives useful overlap with Asia-Pacific and partial overlap with European mornings. Overlap with North America is limited and we state that plainly during scoping rather than after you have committed. Where a role genuinely needs live overlap with a US team for most of the day, we say so instead of proposing an arrangement that will frustrate both sides.
Who owns the code and the intellectual property?
You do, under the contract. Engineers work in your repository under your access controls, so there is no dependency on our infrastructure that would make it awkward to end the arrangement. Notice periods are agreed up front and are the same in both directions.
Can the engineer handle App Store submission and releases?
Yes, where you want that. Many teams prefer to keep release control internally and have the engineer prepare the build instead, which also works. What matters is deciding early, because App Store review timing is one of the few parts of an iOS schedule that nobody controls.
Do you provide iOS engineers who can also cover Android?
Sometimes, but we are cautious about it. Genuine depth in both platforms is less common than CVs suggest, and a nominally cross-platform engineer often turns out to be strong in one and passable in the other. If you need both, we would rather discuss whether that is one person, two people, or a cross-platform framework than put forward someone who will disappoint on one side.
