Of course, Seehorn isn’t the director and writer of the episode, Peter Gould, so her interpretation of the ending may not be strictly canon. She revealed, however, that Gould purposely wrote the final moments of the show vaguely so that the audience could draw their own conclusions:
“I know that Peter wanted to write an ending – and he did it masterfully – that when the screen goes black there won’t just be people thinking one over the other. It’s people continuing the story in their heads.” , that it’s a story that’s still on the way there may be different opinions as to which direction it’s headed, but it’s such a smart ending because it really honors the bigger philosophical questions the show raises about actions and consequences and nature versus nurture and morality and unconditional love.”
In short, the end is entirely up to the public’s interpretation. Will Jimmy and Kim keep a relationship or go their separate ways? Does she forgive him for everything he dragged her into, doesn’t she? All these might make sense within the framework given by the end, and perhaps that is the ultimate power; it relies on the public drawing their own conclusions rather than working them out in detail. While that might work for some shows, “Better Call Saul” has always thrived on ambiguity, and so an open and closed ending like “Breaking Bad” wouldn’t fit.