Thanks for making us aware the content was not time stamped. We've added that now.

Our products are not designed for use in life-critical medical equipment, support appliances, devices, or systems where malfunction of Nordic's products can reasonably be expected to result in personal injury. Customer may not use any of our products in life-critical medical equipment unless adequate design and operating safeguards by customer’s authorized officers have been made.

Thank you for your feedback :)

Check out Nordic Developer Academy where we offer free courses to start learning: academy.nordicsemi.com/

Both the Nordic nRF52 and nRF53 series devices are Bluetooth 5.2 compliant, but the full specification for LE Audio (which is the main new feature in Bluetooth 5.2) is not yet released by the Bluetooth SIG. For this reason we don't yet have any Bluetooth stacks that support 5.2, and it is not yet possible to create end products based on this technology.

Yes, the presentation used in this webinar can be downloaded from DevZone: bit.ly/3pCfNGu (We always add the link in the complete description, after clicking show more).

No, I think it’s correct. 8 rf symbols on the physical layer are required to send 1 bit in long range mode. Or you could say 0.125 bits per symbol.

@@Thompsonnumber4 8 modulations per bit? It sounds like a huge waste of carrier band. Encoding Reed - Solomon is even better. I'm in doubt it's implemented so badly. I feel you are very much wrong

It’s all about extending the range (distance) within a fixed power limit. So yes, using more of the time band and sending data slower. Seems like the SNR or possibly multipath variation is that much worse that they need to do this, to get a signal at all. The coding methods you suggest probably require higher SNR than they have. See p169 of the Bluetooth spec www.mouser.it/pdfdocs/bluetooth-Core-v50.pdf Not a poor choice more like a trade off at extended range.