> >> Hi Tim, > >> > >> It depends on what you refers to Bluetooth: is it Bluetooth Classic > >> or BLE ? > >> > >> If you want BT BLE maybe it is better to use a MCU with BLE. > >> > > > > Thanks Alan > > Bluetooth LE, which is why I put a SiLabs module on the board and have > > it working, but thought "hey, I might be able to offload the cost of > > the module to the customer, and they can use a USB dongle if they > > actually want to use Bluetooth (not all users will)". > > > > And you can further offload the price of USB Dongle Bluetooth using a MCU > with BLE. > > Currently you have three MCUs with BLE support on NuttX: ESP32 (driver is > coming soon), Bouffalo BL-602 and Nordic nRF52832. > > I work at Espressif, so I want to suggest you to consider ESP32! ;-)
Main processor is SAMA5D27C as there are many many peripherals on this custom board (LCD/CAN/GPS/Accelerometers/multiple RGB LED drivers) and a SiLabs/Bouffalo/Nordic SoC will not "cut the mustard" as the main processor; Bluetooth LE is just one of many things not the "main deal". This is why I put the SiLabs SoC on the board as I have used it before with great success and it's not that expensive of course. In this case it's a "network co-processor". The SIG licensing costs mean - and they have not clarified this to me as yet - that there is a possibility that a board with USB and a Bluetooth stack but no radio module included *may* not need the $8k declaration fee which is completely out of step with the target volumes of this design. I was/am hoping that using a plug-in radio module via USB, of the customer's choice (i.e. not supplied as part of the product) works around the need to declare the product. But this is probably cloud-cuckoo land lol. With hindsight, Wi-Fi may have been a much better choice :(
