Added this link to original post http://www.ghielectronics.com/downloads/G400/G400-D_Module_Brochure.pdf
Note that this may completely change, from memory size to anything else.
@ Gus - In the original post you wrote āCANā. Canāt find it in the brouchure.
Nice!! canāt wait to get the gadgeteer version 
Sounds like a nice 2nd variant of our main board, if G120 is to slow 
Would be perfect to have all SoM (G400, G120) availabale as DIMM, if the special GPIOās like CAN, SPI, ā¦ are on the same pins.
Then you ājustā have to switch to different SoM if you Need more power.
b.t.w Am I right that G400 has Builtin Ethernet?
Not bad idea but remember that G120 is much smaller in size. Many applications need a very tiny module, like G120.
@ Reinhard Ostermeier - It is probably possible to put G120 on DIMM carrier board. Just thinking out loud.
This is actually a great idea 
Super cool!! GHI love it, may I join beta testing?
Thx!
Ha ha! If you think the G120 is tough, wait till you try to manually solder the 200 pins on the SODIMM socket. Assuming you will do them manually of course?
I just did one tonight for the prototype PCB to test with the ChipworkX and it needed a lot of solder braid to get it done! 
Canāt wait to get my hands on the G400.
@ Dave McLaughlin - I hear you there.
So the only thing you are announcing is that there will be a G400?
@ Mike, perhaps just āyes something will be called G400-Dā
I guess that is why he said that this may completely change.
Any chance of releasing the port source code (minus the premium libraries, of course), similar to what youāve done with the USBizi stuff?
Iāve always found the GHI hardware to be a relatively good value, so Iām definitely interested in the module. However, Iām really apprehensive about buying anything closed-source ā especially with the amount of interop code and NETMF tweaks I make.
It is an option but would probably be too expensive for what you need. I recommend Hydra for what you need.
By the way, most serious commercial users would never want to take the risk of taking on the huge load of working with the few million line of the source codes. We have 10 people working on this full time. Most companies would not have the resources needed and so they pick the premium option. They either use RLP or hire us to add/change what they want, easier cheaper and much lower risk. This may not apply to you specifically, I am generally speaking.
@ Jay, if you have tweaks to the main NetMF, is it worth putting them back into the general NetMF source?
Yeah, if I were with a company trying to roll out a product, that makes perfect sense. And I understand that itās hard to monetize a hardware platform thatās open-source. However, Iām a PhD student in a research lab; although weāre pretty applications-oriented, we still do quite a bit of original research (especially in WSN technology). Although Iām sure GHI has extremely competent programmers, Iām not sure Iād feel comfortable hiring out the programming of, say, a new LDPC algorithm or intelligent channel-hopping scheme. Those sorts of algorithms are so specific to such a small field of engineering, most programmers have never written anything like that. RLP is an option for speeding up parts of time-critical code, but I donāt think itās a very elegant solution; I like the notion of interop assemblies. Thatās why I asked.
I guess Iāll start working on that iMX233 portā¦
Absolutely. Thereās no good mechanism to do that right now (GHI uses the official releases of NETMF to build firmware, and the official NETMF is a different codebase than, say, the netmf codeplex distribution (which is easier to get changes put into).
Timing couldnāt be better, looking forward to it.
Awesome to both products. I wanted a 4.3 screen for some time now.