I have had a quick look at their most recent patents (they only have 5 patents so far) and it looks like a lot of active alignments are required and as one would suspect insertion losses are significant when compared to what POET achieves.

FIG. 4 shows a diagram of the hybrid MWS 100 indicating where optical losses occur, in accordance with some embodiments. For each wavelength of light generated by a corresponding one of the plurality of lasers DFB-1 to DFB-N in the laser array chip 103, a first optical loss L1 occurs at the interface between the laser array chip 103 and the PLC 105. In some embodiments, the first optical loss L1 is less than or equal to about 2 dB. For each wavelength of light, a second optical loss L2 occurs as the light travels through the PLC 105 to the plurality (M) of optical outputs PLC-O1 to PLC-OM of the PLC 105. In some embodiments, the second optical loss L2 is less than or equal to about 1.7 dB. Also, for each wavelength of light, a third optical loss L3 occurs at the interface between the PLC 105 of the optical fiber 151-x. In some embodiments, the third optical loss L3 is less than or equal to about 1 dB 

Compared to what POET achieves with the optical interpose these losses are significantly larger.

As I say this is really a quick look but I don’t think this platform poses a risk for POET in terms of efficiency, cost and breadth of application.