Well, in more than a decade of producing sub duty grade products at premium prices, nothing EOtech has done has excelled or given me reason believe in the product.
I fail to see how getting very successfully and expensively sued will overcome grave engineering problems, and result in a product worthy of duty use or cash being spent. EOTech had the Golden Goose by the balls. They had plenty of time and money available to cure the problems inherent with their design. Instead they chose to jump on GG's balls with golf shoes and send him a bill for it.
Getting sued and paying back massive amounts of money does not magically make the product improve. If this product was improvable, EOtech would have done it long ago. It isn't and they didn't.
Wishing that EOtech is or could be viable does not make it so.
Consider:
-They are still thermally unstable.
-Battery life is still only 600 claimed hours.
-They still inexplicably shut off, or fail to start in the first place.
I didn't start out to make this an AP vs. EO thing, but there are only three RDS players. EO is arguably not one of them. And the MRO is pretty new, albeit with generally decent reviews. That leaves the Swedes.
The warranty is non starter, because the two competitors have always had a solid warranty, and EO is more than a decade late with a viable warranty. There are two reasons for that; business and marketing. Neither of those are good for you as a user. Business: EO product was so bad they couldn't afford to stand behind it. Marketing: Their product reputation is now proven to be so bad they can't afford not to stand behind the product.
Ask yourself (honestly) what EO does that the others don't.
I would have liked for Helen Keller to have regained her vision too, but it just wasn't in the cards...