Donot take me wrong. I want you to be right as it will benefit as well. But your or my wish does not matter if the results are not delivered by the management.
I still assume it would had been better to bring akida 2000 than akida 1500 even if that means extra time.
I am worried company is launching akida 1500 just like akida 1000 in a hurry and any failure here will be detrimental.
On the positive note if company can recover the cost of akida 1500 from its sale it will be a good outcome.
I think you have this a little twisted rgupta.
Akd1000 - was released to customers (primarily those in the EAP) for incorporation into their intended products.
It was also licensed by two non-EAP customers.
These EAP customers requested some changes, which have been incorporated into Akd1500, a chip that’s basically a tweaked version of the original, with the same intended uses.
Akd2000 is a different beast all together and by large would be an overkill for those originally use cases.
Similar to how all the other chip manufacturers (including ARM) have many different offerings for different applications.
The existence of one doesn’t relinquish the value of another. You wouldn’t need the same processor for AI doorbell as you would for a LiDAR system for example.