Dear Nordic Team,
I want to ask you about your plans for the NRF9160 chip. It is a fascinating device, but there is one possible disadvantage. Please let me explain.
I have noticed that your libraries are using Zephyr sockets to communicate with the Modem. Does it mean that the interface to the Modem is bounded only with Zephyr API? Is there a possibility to use other RTOS and communicate with the modem without including your code's whole base? Previously, in one of the projects I am still working on, we are using NRF52 device. Unfortunately, due to Bluetooth libraries' limitation, we had to rewrite a lot of your code, causing ongoing issue with supporting your device. Your code's heavy fingerprint and wide interfaces increased the development cost in the later stage, eating any savings made on the hardware. Due to the experience, I must know how flexible or inflexible your interface to the modem is? I managed to rewrite drivers for every single peripheral in NRF52, to enable merging it with incompatible software, but LTE is a different beast.
In short, we can't choose your NRF9160 chip if your Modem IPC interface is not RTOS agnostic. The same problem goes down to Keil uVision vs Segger as we only use Keil.
Please advise.
