You make some valid points that are true and highlight positive...

You make some valid points that are true and highlight positive aspects of what they are attempting to undertake, however 'only integration onto a generic platform' is pretty far away from what is actually going on.

They have only ever achieved their milestones at the cell level, which is rather meaningless when it comes to commercial manufacture. Sure, it holds weight and means a lot from an R&D perspective, but the same does not apply to commercialization and this is the exact reason why they are manufacturing a 1MB chip.

Company announcements confirm this point again and again, a 1MB chip (i.e. cells upon cells layered and stacked and addressed as a chip) is required for any statistical significant data on speed, retention, endurance and yield. They need to replicate what they have achieved at the cell level in this 1MB chip otherwise this will go nowhere. The reality is they don't know if they can replicate the cell performance in a chip because they have never done it before, this is new tech.

You don't need to take my word for it, Guido confirms all of the above in this interview: (https://www.insidemarket.net/post/why-is-the-world-s-leading-innovation-hub-so-excited-about-a-tiny-australian-tech-company) *link was posted by another user previously in this thread.