Re: BLE Nitrogen
> Well, board configuration is different, different pins are used for LEDs, buttons and UART, but from BLE point of view everything should be the same, correct?
Can you check how you configured UART flow control on both boards you have used? Mabey this cause your troubles?
From: zephyr-devel-bounces@... [mailto:zephyr-devel-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Marti Bolivar
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 6:42 AM
To: Chettimada, Vinayak Kariappa <vinayak.kariappa.chettimada@...>
Cc: zephyr-devel@...; Zarkhin, Gene <Gene_Zarkhin@...>
Subject: Re: [Zephyr-devel] BLE Nitrogen
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Chettimada, Vinayak Kariappa <vinayak.kariappa.chettimada@...> wrote:
FWIW, my personal experience with 1.0 Nitrogen boards has been... suboptimal. 1.1 is indeed better and usable for things like IPSP at shorter ranges, but still falls short of other boards I've tried. Gene, if you can get them replaced with 1.1s, I'd start there.
For comparison, see BLE Nano 2 for another small form-factor Zephyr compatible nRF52 board, which claims BLE 4.2 certification: https://github.com/redbear/nRF5x/blob/master/nRF52832/docs/Specifications.md#ble-module-mb-n2