IEEE Internet of Things Journal

I would like to ask how long it usually takes for the decision to be made. I have been waiting for a long time and still have not received any results, so I am quite anxious. Thank you all!
Also, based on the comments from the previous Irons, I still don't quite understand the interpretation of capitalization and the "awaiting decision" status.
One interpretation I have is: when the submission is just made, it is capitalized, indicating that it is in the hands of the editorial department. Then it becomes lowercase, indicating that it has entered the external review stage and is in the hands of the reviewers. Afterwards, it becomes capitalized again, indicating that some reviewers have completed their reviews and it is now awaiting the recommendation of the Associate Editor (AE). Then, "awaiting decision" means that the AE has finished recommending and it is now waiting for the final decision from the Editor-in-Chief (EIC).
Another interpretation I have is: when the submission is just made, it is capitalized, indicating that it is in the hands of the editorial department. Then it becomes lowercase, indicating that it has entered the external review stage and is in the hands of the reviewers. Afterwards, it becomes capitalized again, indicating that some reviewers have completed their reviews, but not all of them. Then, "awaiting decision" means that all reviewers have completed their reviews and it is now waiting for the recommendation of the AE. The AE will make the final decision and there is no need to submit it to the EIC again.
I wonder which interpretation the Irons think is more reasonable? Thank you!

I also want to share my experience as the corresponding author of this article. I am the first author. It took 11 months to finally get accepted.

1. Submitted in July 2021.
2. On October 24, 2021, we received revision comments with only 4 weeks given for revisions. The revisions were extensive, with feedback from five expert reviewers, including suggestions from four junior colleagues and one senior colleague, totaling dozens of points.
3. Submitted the revised version on November 15, 2021. The revisions were challenging, and we had to redo one crucial experimental grouping. The point-by-point response reached 65 pages.
4. On January 18, 2022, we received the review results, and all five reviewers were very satisfied with the revisions. However, minor revisions were requested, with only 3 weeks given for revisions.
5. Submitted the revised version on February 7, 2022.
6. Accepted on May 25, 2022. Prior to acceptance, I had to carefully follow up three times, sending reminders every month.

The above information is provided for reference. My student has published several articles in this journal, and my experience tells me that authors must be patient. Journal peer review is highly professional, and revisions should be as thorough as possible. At the same time, when submitting, it is essential to evaluate the innovation of your article seriously. If the innovation is not significant, it is better not to submit to avoid wasting valuable time.