Forums

Hi,

You can read some more about the TI BLE solution (CC2540) here:

http://www.ti.com/ww/en/analog/bluetooth/index.htm?DCMP=BluetoothLowEnergy&HQS=NotApplicable+OT+bluetoothlowenergy

-P

Thank you.

Yes, that is precisely the kind of things I have seen for the past year or so. Where is the beef?

:) Glad you're asking.  It means we're getting the word out there.  The CC2540 is still a pre-release part, so we don't generally supply extensive information on the device in advance of the release to market.  As soon as the Bluetooth specification is finalized and our solution is certified (which we promise will happen very quickly after finalization of the spec) we will be releasing the CC2540 to market along with everything you need to build a complete Bluetooth low energy single mode solution.   Hope you can wait just a little bit longer and thanks for your patience.  

OK...so how is the release of the CC2540 progressing? Are there any preliminary documents to consume?? Using the CC2430 as a reference, I'm a bit disappointed in that document.....I still haven't figured out the pins for the USART...I must be missing something.

OK ... forget the dumb comments about the USART...I decided to look a bit farther...I'm just used to the datasheet having all the information....I found the User's Guide...

What is your take on the register set similarity between the CC2430 and the CC2540?

I'd like to know if there will be a single mode master and a single mode slave device? Your competitors are releasing a slave device first and the master will follow in 2011. I can't understand the point of not having a master or slave (or both) and what the hardware has to do with that??......I'm sure it is just my ignorance at this point.   I'm starting to think BTLE doesn't mean much without the mobile phones supporting a dual mode stack........I find myself migrating back to standard BT and controllng the TX power.....I guess if I had a single mode master BTLE and  single mode slave BLTE I could move forward and then hope the next generation of phones support the dual mode.........and I still want the ability to have a scatternet even if I have to modify the software provided......will there be limitations there?? Will there be support for a device being both a master and a slave?? 

I think there is a reference design for the CC2530 and the CC2591 front end.....I was curious about the CC2530 versus the CC2540 just for that capability. While it may not make a low power module, it would make a nice wide area piconet with less overhead in the packet transmissions.

Rich,

Have a look at the CC2530 instead of the CC2430...

Regards,
Kjetil