Yes. We’re used to working with partial documentation, early silicon, and evolving baselines. We often start development using simulators, engineering samples, or remote access to lab setups — and adjust as the hardware matures.

We don’t work from templates. Everything we build is tailored to the platform, toolchain, and real-world use cases. Our senior engineers work directly with your architecture and test teams to ensure alignment and maintainability.

We adapt. Whether you’re using a vendor-specific SDK, an in-house GCC fork, or a mixed toolchain setup, we integrate with what’s already in place. We focus on compatibility, not disruption.

Yes. We’ve successfully delivered projects with incomplete or evolving specs. We rely on system analysis, hands-on testing, and close coordination with your team to move development forward with confidence.

We’re available under a post-delivery support agreement (SLA or equivalent) to investigate, patch, and document fixes. Support scope and response times are defined in the master service agreement, ensuring issues are handled promptly without ad-hoc costs.

Absolutely. We’ve dealt with undocumented codebases, outdated stacks, and low-level code from over a decade ago. We can refactor, port, or modernize it safely.

We use modular architecture, abstraction layers, and regression testing to maintain forward and backward compatibility. It’s part of how we support evolving platforms.

Yes. We design for modularity. Whether it’s adding a sensor driver or updating config tools, we isolate changes to avoid disrupting the rest of the system.

Yes. We often bridge both — building internal tools and docs while adapting SDKs and onboarding material for partner ecosystems.

We follow a structured ramp-up process that includes onboarding workshops, knowledge sharing with your internal teams, and direct access to product owners. Even with limited documentation, we build context quickly and move forward with minimal disruption.