[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Anyone with Experience on ARM926-EJ? [Nexperia PNX6712]



Hello Bil

Am 2008-06-12 11:29:49, schrieb Bill Gatliff:
> Michelle Konzack wrote:
> > in one of my projects I have the need for a GSM chip an now (yesterday)
> > gotten a NXP "Nexperia PNX6712" which is based on the ARM926-EJ...
> 
> Where did you get the board?  That class of chip is kind of hard to come by in
> the catalog market...

:-/

I have gotten it directly of an NXP Distributor, but you must be a  Pre-
Selected customer of NXP to be authorized to get this chip. I have tried
to order from Atmel, but there (For the chips I am interested in) I need
to be a "Pre-qualified customer" which is a little bit difficult, IF you
are starting a new enterprise...

And of course, I have gotten not a Board but a singel Chip including the
datasheet and whole specs.  I like to use it byside of the ARM1176 and a
Atheros a/b/g chip.

Also the PNX6712 will handel the asterik stuff and the POT/ISDN port.

Oh yes, I have seen peoples disassembling older Cell-Phones to  get  the
ARM-Multimedia Chips and coding stuff for it...

Ny "Nokia 6120 classic" is a 369MHz powered ARM11 with 128MB NAND memory
and 64 MB SDRAM and more infos you can get here: 
    <http://www.forum.nokia.com/devices/6120_classic>

I should note, that I have gotten a second used Nokia, which I  like  to
use for my ARM-Experiemnts...  I like to have a console ONLY Cell-Phone.


Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
    Michelle Konzack
    Systemadministrator
    24V Electronic Engineer
    Tamay Dogan Network
    Debian GNU/Linux Consultant


-- 
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack   Apt. 917                  ICQ #328449886
+49/177/9351947    50, rue de Soultz         MSN LinuxMichi
+33/6/61925193     67100 Strasbourg/France   IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)

Attachment: signature.pgp
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: