Misleading
1
By Potpolly
Not user friendly! Should give you 2 weeks TOTALLY Free to see if it works for desired applications
THE APP I HAVE BEEN NEEDING
5
By Ozkar18
I work in shipping/receiving and we count SO MANY different materials. This app works wonderfully in avoiding having to count 300-400 bars by hand. Also, it counts several different types of material. It is well worth the money.
Tried and failed
2
By SolidJake88
Started the free trial and gave it a shot. Tried doing multiple counts and different angles on each one to test the app and I could never get an accurate count. I do inventory analysis so this would’ve been the perfect tool for me. If the app had worked properly and gave me an accurate count then it would cut my work load in half. I really hate that it didn’t work.
Love it
5
By Slimey sue
It would be cool if you could toggle the opacity of the numbers and the picture to check in real time , that being said, I have used it three times to count rebar and then I counted, using a sharpie to dot, and it’s been right on every time🤟
Don’t buy this
1
By sly hujhggfgh
Bad
Complete garbage for counting pipe out in the field waste of 40$
1
By A.T.Rose
Biggest waste of money you can spend, horrible for out door construction pipe counting
Extremely Limited
1
By Gone3uo6
It might work with plain and obvious objects that are completely identical, but it struggles to get accurate counts on things in the experimental mode like nuts and bolts.
Horribly Inaccurate
1
By Dezy_21
I tried over 10 times and it failed to count the objects accurately, or even at all….don’t waste your money
Inventory
5
By ryanc4242
This app is super for counting inventory of pipe/conduit. Makes an hour job down to just minutes. Great especially when it’s cold outside!!!
Didn’t work for my application
1
By No names for nicking
I bought it for year because I have drone photos of cars on my lots. Very definitive vehicles, and the app can’t count them. I uploaded the example photo for help, and no reply. The no reply got you a 1 star. Had you replied I would probably would have rated it a 3.