Editorial Policy

Effective 30 July 2026. Last updated 30 July 2026.

This page describes how reviews on this site are researched, what we will and will not assert, and how to challenge something we got wrong. It is written to be checkable rather than reassuring.

How pricing is established

Vendor pricing pages are the only source we treat as authoritative. Every price we publish is checked against the vendor’s own current pricing page, and the article states the date it was checked.

Where a vendor does not publish pricing, we say so. We do not print a third-party reconstruction as if it were a price. Several major platforms in this category are quote-only, and “this vendor does not disclose pricing” is the accurate finding, not a gap to be filled. Where we mention a third-party estimate for context, it is labelled an estimate.

We report the pricing model, not just the number. Whether a platform charges per user, per technician, or a flat plan with seats included changes the real cost far more than the headline figure. So does the cost of the next seat, and whether implementation is billed separately.

Roundup prices go stale fast. That includes ours. Prices are accurate to the stated date and no further, which is why every article tells you to check the vendor page before buying.

How capabilities are established

Documentation over marketing pages. Where possible, capability claims come from vendor help-centre articles and product documentation rather than marketing copy, because help centres describe what software actually does — including its limits and its tier gating.

Hands-on and documentation-based reviews are labelled differently. If we have run a platform on real work, the article says so. If we have assessed it from documentation, the article says that instead. We will not describe a documentation review as testing. Enterprise platforms with multi-month implementations are usually assessed from documentation, and we name that limitation where it applies.

Unverified is a valid answer. If we cannot establish something from a primary source, the article marks it unverified rather than asserting it. In this category the gap between what a platform is reported to do and what it documents itself doing is wide.

How rankings are decided

Rankings reflect breadth of verified capability against the work the software is bought to do — equipment and asset records, maintenance agreements, dispatch, mobile reliability, accounting sync, and what documentation lands after a job is finished.

Rankings are not ordered by price, by popularity, by how many people search for a name, or by any commercial consideration. Every platform we rank gets a stated weakness and, where we can determine it, an explicit note on who should not buy it. If we cannot find a genuine weakness in a platform, that means we have not researched it well enough yet.

Where a platform is widely recommended but we have not verified it, we list it as unranked rather than ranking it on reputation.

Vendor relationships

No vendor pays for coverage, placement, ranking or a favourable conclusion. No vendor is shown a review before it publishes, and no vendor has editorial approval over anything on this site.

Some outbound links carry a referrer parameter identifying this site as the source of the visit.

Where the video fits

Most reviews have a companion video breakdown on our YouTube channel. The written article is the record. Where a video and an article disagree, the article is the corrected version — it is researched after filming and is updated over time, while a published video is fixed.

Corrections

Getting something wrong and fixing it quickly is the only credibility mechanism a review publication really has.

If a price, capability or claim on this site is wrong or out of date, tell us. When we correct something material we change the article, update the last-updated date, and note what changed. We do not silently edit a substantive error and pretend it was always right.

Corrections can be raised through the contact route in the privacy policy or in the comments on the YouTube channel.

Who writes this

Reviews are published under a named byline with a profile page listing what that author covers. See our authors.

AI use

Research on this site uses automated tooling — search data, SERP capture, and language models for research synthesis and drafting. Every factual claim that reaches publication is checked against a primary source, and a model’s output is never published as fact on its own. Editorial judgement, ranking decisions and the final text are human-reviewed.