Tested, then shipped.
In that order.

No, and no honest QA software testing company can. Software of any real complexity cannot be exhaustively tested, and anyone promising bug-free delivery is promising something they cannot verify. What we guarantee is the process that makes escaped defects rare and survivable: a written risk-based strategy, automated suites on every merge, manual and real-device passes before release, severity triage you can trust, and a release gate that nothing skips. A regression suite on top of that ensures a bug fixed stays fixed. That is a guarantee we can put in writing and be held to.

Both, in a ratio that depends on your product, which is what the strategy works out before you commit. Automation excels at repetition: regression checks, integration contracts, the flows you need verified on every single merge. Manual testing excels at judgement: exploratory work, usability, visual quality, the edge cases nobody wrote down. The trap we help you avoid is ideology in either direction: automating everything (expensive to maintain, blind to experience) or hand-testing everything (slow, unrepeatable, morale-sanding). The written strategy states which flows get which treatment and why.

Yes, most QA-as-a-service work is exactly that: code written by your in-house team, another supplier or a developer who has since left. We start with a no-blame read of the product, its bug history and its support tickets. Then we build the strategy around the risks we actually find rather than the ones the original builders assumed. Defect reports come back reproducible: steps, environment, evidence, so your developers spend their time fixing, not deciphering. Independence is the point: a quality assurance software testing company with no stake in the code's reputation reports what is true.

The matrix is agreed from your analytics, not from a standard list: testing browsers your users don't visit with is theatre. Typically that means the current and recent versions of the major browsers across desktop and mobile, plus physical iOS and Android hardware weighted towards what your traffic actually carries. That includes the mid-range Android on a patchy connection that emulators are too polite to simulate. The matrix is written into the strategy and revisited as your traffic shifts.

Inside them. Automated suites are built to run in your CI on every merge (GitHub Actions, GitLab CI or what you already have), so the gate is enforced by machinery rather than memory. Defects land in your tracker in your format, reproducible and severity-triaged; testers join your standups where that helps. If your pipeline itself needs building before suites have somewhere to run, that is our DevOps service, and the two engagements dovetail cleanly. The intent throughout is that the testers work as part of your team, not as a report that arrives from outside.

The difference is how the work plugs in. Our testers work as part of your team: suites run in your CI, defects land in your tracker, and testers join your standups where that helps. Every engagement starts with a written, risk-based test strategy your team can read and challenge. The suites are built in your repositories with IP assigned, so your regression suite keeps running without us.

The suites are code, and like all code we write, they are yours: built in your repositories, documented, with IP assigned in the contract. If we part ways, your regression suite keeps running without us. And yes, agencies white-label QA constantly; independent testing is one of the easiest services to add to an agency offer because it attaches to work you already sell. Your brand on the reports, our testers behind them, NDA-backed with a commitment never to approach your clients. The average partnership runs past two years.