Large, data-heavy enterprise web applications — hundreds of grids, forms and charts that real businesses run on. Framework-level Sencha Ext JS authority, including years developing the framework itself and formal MVP recognition.
The industry's frontend conversation is about consumer apps and this year's framework. Your reality is different: an Ext JS application with a decade of business logic in it, the engineers who built it gone, an upgrade postponed until it became scary — and consultants whose only answer is "rewrite it in React," which trades a working system for a two-year bet.
Data-heavy enterprise UIs are their own discipline: grid performance at scale, stateful screens users live in eight hours a day, accessibility, theming, and code that must stay maintainable for years. That discipline is what this practice sells.
Most Ext JS consultants have used the framework. I've spent years building it — which changes what's possible when your application misbehaves.
Multi-version feature development on Ext JS itself for Sencha — grids, charts, CSP support, accessibility, tooling up to Java 21, IDE plugins for VS Code, JetBrains and Eclipse. When your bug is actually the framework's bug, that history is the difference.
Formal MVP recognition in the Sencha ecosystem, used here as evidence rather than positioning.
Architecture review of your existing application — code, server interactions, custom components, performance — followed by a defensible roadmap and estimate to the latest version. Done for a Fortune 500 energy multinational's global ExtJS estate.
The honest comparison against a rewrite is part of the deliverable.
Applications built around serious data: monitoring consoles, BI portals, document intelligence frontends. Ext JS where it fits, React/TypeScript where it fits — including responsive, themable consoles for enterprise database tooling and banking AI.
Grids that hold up under real volumes, dashboards DBAs actually use, dark themes done properly.
Frontend maintainability as an engineering goal: component architecture, state management, Node.js build tooling, and the review discipline that keeps a ten-year-old codebase shippable.
Plus the published side — plugins and overrides the community can download and inspect.
100% remote, in English or Spanish. The review is the usual entry point — it converts fear of the upgrade into a plan with numbers.
Fixed-scope review of your Ext JS or enterprise JS application, ending in findings, recommendations, a roadmap and an estimate leadership can decide on.
The grid that dies at 50,000 rows, the component that leaks, the theme that breaks on upgrade — problems that need someone who has been inside the framework.
Senior authority inside your product team: UI architecture, component design, code review and mentoring while the roadmap ships.
Design and delivery of a data-heavy frontend — a monitoring console, BI portal or AI application UI — with the backend integration included.
A selection from the full project history — each row links to the detailed record.
The questions engineering directors ask when the frontend becomes the bottleneck.
Review first, then decide with evidence. The usual outcome is an upgrade roadmap with an estimate — as delivered for a Fortune 500 energy multinational — because a disciplined upgrade is almost always cheaper and safer than the rewrite a generalist consultancy will quote.
No. Ext JS is where the framework-level authority is, but the practice covers enterprise JavaScript broadly — React and TypeScript frontends, Node.js tooling, IDE integrations, and the architecture of long-lived, data-heavy applications.
Yes — many engagements combine hands-on work with raising the team: code review, patterns, component architecture, and the practices that keep a large UI maintainable for a decade.
The practice is UI architecture and engineering — grids, charts, theming, accessibility, performance — not brand design. I work with your designers when you have them, and apply solid, sober enterprise UX when you don't.
Tell me what it runs on and what hurts. If the answer is a review, you'll get a plan with numbers; if it's a fix, you'll get the fix.