First of all, I'd ignore all the haters in this thread. A lot of people on here are badmouthing the final output when in reality they're wannabe co-founders in the second year of their CS degree. They say they can produce a better output with less cost, I wouldn't be so sure about that.
At the end of the day you made a torturous, exhausting investment that seems to be making fantastic returns for you. So at least you can sleep well knowing that!
The part that sounds fishy to me is that at the very end of the 'rebranding' work he suggested that their you use their in-house developer to integrate the design rather than yours.
As a developer I'd be pissed if my employer gave me some 80% done design mockups and told me to go integrate it into a codebase I'm unfamiliar with. Especially if I wasn't consulted or given the codebase before hand.
They then marked the largest task as a one week job then took five weeks to complete it. It sounds like they used the developer as a scapegoat and continued to tie up all the design loose ends in those five weeks. That would explain why the developer started doing some minor bug-fixes within the first few weeks rather than 'doing the thing' because 'the thing' wasn't ready yet. I could be wrong, but if this is true, my heart goes out to that overworked developer. Hoping you're making the big bucks buddy.
I always notice that when someone is upset about 'moralism' and 'cancel culture' against a text, they rarely engage with the actual criticism against said text.
Has anyone actually looked at the drawings in Dr. Seuss' books? His political cartoons? Has anyone actually read American Dirt?
I agree that we shouldn't be outright censoring books, but that hasn't happened yet. You can still read JK Rowling, you can still find the six discontinued Dr. Seuss books quite easily. And no doubt, some of the imagery is slightly offensive at best, to overtly racist at worst.
The next time someone decries the 'cancellation' of something. Look at their reasoning instead of knee jerk reacting.
First of all, I'd ignore all the haters in this thread. A lot of people on here are badmouthing the final output when in reality they're wannabe co-founders in the second year of their CS degree. They say they can produce a better output with less cost, I wouldn't be so sure about that.
At the end of the day you made a torturous, exhausting investment that seems to be making fantastic returns for you. So at least you can sleep well knowing that!
The part that sounds fishy to me is that at the very end of the 'rebranding' work he suggested that their you use their in-house developer to integrate the design rather than yours.
As a developer I'd be pissed if my employer gave me some 80% done design mockups and told me to go integrate it into a codebase I'm unfamiliar with. Especially if I wasn't consulted or given the codebase before hand.
They then marked the largest task as a one week job then took five weeks to complete it. It sounds like they used the developer as a scapegoat and continued to tie up all the design loose ends in those five weeks. That would explain why the developer started doing some minor bug-fixes within the first few weeks rather than 'doing the thing' because 'the thing' wasn't ready yet. I could be wrong, but if this is true, my heart goes out to that overworked developer. Hoping you're making the big bucks buddy.