One by one by one: Nokia N95 vs N96 vs N97

Hi steve,

N97's screen size is mentioned wrongly as 3.2 and it should be 3.5 😊

widehead wrote:I don't get it. My N97 mini is a joke. Poor battery life. Average camera. Buggy. Laggy. Delicate metal surround that looks AWFUL when scratched. Still the same old S60 shoe-horned into a touch UI with all those redundant menus etc.

People talk about touch UIs like they're a step forward - they're not. They are, at present, a gimmick that actually slows down productivity and day-to-day usage. It's simply faster and easier to use hardware buttons and anyone who says otherwise is in denial due to the hundreds of pounds they've thrown away on substandard devices.

I'll say it again - the best Nokia phone out there at the moment is the N86 8GB. It does absolutely everything that the mini can do (without the hassle of the touch UI) and more. And where they overlap the N86 8MP wins outright.

Talking about the N97 mini as a flagship (just as with the N95, N96 and N97) is beyond ridiculous.

I agree that touch is less usefull than button.
Unfortunately, Nokia button (S60v3) has no nHD screen.
It's the screen size that make me re-think on buying the E72.

.....
I almost buy E72 to replace my aging E61i.
But when I compare it to N97/N97 mini at the Nokia store.
I change my mind.
I decide NOT to buy any nokia at the moment.
nHD screen is a must. 320x240 is not good for browsing
but N97/N97mini doesn't have the E series se*ist appeal.

N95 8gb trumps em all hands down. No strings attached. That's all I have to say. N86 is a mix bag of updates and degrades from N95 8gb. I, however, love that look and finish of n86.

widehead wrote:Again, what's with the idea that touch UI is newer and therefore better? It's clearly not better in the slightest.

And complaining about a dual-slider that actually helps control of media playback in landscape mode is bordering on the insane. It works - why replace it with an interface that a) wasn't designed for touch, b) is slow and c) hinders day-to-day usage?

Someone please enlighten me - why is S60 5th edition better than non-touch devices running essentially the same software?

for me, a screen size below 3" is fail, without a qwerty is 2x fail, without touch is 3x fail...and that's basically the advantages of N97 over the 2.

One development of these phones (and Nokia S60 phones in general over the past ~2 years), that I really don't like, is that they been cutting down the C drive storage, where all the important stuff are stored.

N95 had 160MB, N96 had 80MB and N97 had 50MB.
E51 had 130MB and the E52 got 60MB.

Why on earth do Nokia cut down on the C drive storage!? I would say that only having 60MB of storage on the C drive is my biggest issue with the E52.

widehead wrote:Again, what's with the idea that touch UI is newer and therefore better? It's clearly not better in the slightest.

And complaining about a dual-slider that actually helps control of media playback in landscape mode is bordering on the insane. It works - why replace it with an interface that a) wasn't designed for touch, b) is slow and c) hinders day-to-day usage?

Someone please enlighten me - why is S60 5th edition better than non-touch devices running essentially the same software?

It's not really a question of better or worse, as both have their advantages and disadvantages; they are simply different. There are clearly situations/actions for which a phone having buttons is the better device, while there are others for which a touch-screen offers certain advantages.

I have an E90 and an iPod Touch; both are great devices, but I don't use my iPT as a PDA as a) I don't need to and b) I don't like typing on the on-screen keyboard. I for one can not see myself buying a new phone which does not have a physical QWERTY keyboard...

As a user you have to decide what is more important to you, make your decision, and, most importantly, don't let anyone else tell you that you've made the wrong choice...

miko wrote:for me, a screen size below 3" is fail, without a qwerty is 2x fail, without touch is 3x fail...and that's basically the advantages of N97 over the 2.

Whats all this abuse of the word fail? Oh well, may as well join in .....

Qwerty with only 3 rows of keys, no separate numeric section - thats 4xfail.

The worst non-touch -> touch interface in the history of computing - 5xfail.

The N97 isn't bad, and to be honest neither is the N96.

However its the N95 that will stand the test of time.

I'm now thinking of selling on my N85, and going back to the well worn, but ultimately better N95-1.

The camera is *not* the same on the two, even though they're "Carl Zeiss 5mp units". Actual image quality is better on the N95.

Every single time Nokia releases a new product, they appear to start from scratch with the firmware, introducing new bugs. The N85 (on v31) still has SMS sending problems, browser disconnecting from the cellular network, and relatively lousy RF performance. Dual LEDs do not make a darned difference on image quality (stills). It may look better, and the UI may be a little slicker, but the N95 is still "the daddy".

Steve

You continuosly write about the not good GPS of the N97 but I think your opinion is based on your defective unit (also after the patch of shielded antenna). For sure, a number of erlier units with defective GPS have been sold but I can assure you that my unit that I bought in October 2009 has no problems. I use it regularly with many softwares (Garmin, OVI maps, google maps, Sportstracker) and it works perfectly (also without AGPS).

About the other aspect of the N97, coming from the N95 (that I loved) I can say that the N97 is much better (better WiFi, data connection, battery life, screen, USB speed, stability and so on).

Kazutoyo wrote:One development of these phones (and Nokia S60 phones in general over the past ~2 years), that I really don't like, is that they been cutting down the C drive storage, where all the important stuff are stored.

N95 had 160MB, N96 had 80MB and N97 had 50MB.
E51 had 130MB and the E52 got 60MB.

Why on earth do Nokia cut down on the C drive storage!? I would say that only having 60MB of storage on the C drive is my biggest issue with the E52.

I know the answer to this question!!!!
N95 has S60v3 FP1. C drive 256MB, OS were almost 100MB, so it leaves you 160MB.
N96 has S60v3 FP2. C drive 256MB, OS around 170MB, so it leaves you 80MB
N97 has S60v5. C drive 256MB, OS around 200MB, so it leaves you 50MB.

The problem is NOKIA is stupi*ly not upgrading the C drive size. And with current ADVANCE web browser in nokia phone and ever complex web site, the 50MB-80MB is really FAR THAN ENOUGH.

The current N97 mini, E72, X6, 5235_come_with_music has 512MB C drive. This happend because nokia receive complain from the user returning a good load of N97 just because out of memory.... especially while browsing. Although this already a good sign over the 256MB disk they use in the previous model, I still believe Nokia not really serious with their devices. As smartphone becoming smarter we need more RAM. I wanna listen to music while web browsing and use the GPS. I wanna use the GPS then find information on the web, and I might want to open a couple of web tabs to track several things at once. For example, hotel list, restaurant list, etc....

I'm a longtime nokiafan. in recent years I had the N73, the N82 and the N97.
The N97 however isn't worth its high price...
I've had all kinds of problems with it, from the scratching lens cover to the poor GPS reception...
I sold it about 3 weeks ago and decided to give nokia one more chance...
and boy did they deliver me one hell of a phone, and their one true flagship... The N900.
I've been playing with it for about a week now and every second I get more and more impressed.
This is what the N97 should have been...
sure it doesn't have enough apps yet, but maemo is the shit, let me tell you that.
If you are used to symbian and switch to maemo, you will never want to go back again...
It just works.

N82.

I have an N96 and I'm very pleased with it! The d-pad has started to make that 'spongy' sound that a few other people have noticed too, but that's not a problem. =3
I'm not buying into all this touchscreen stuff yet. I have used an iPhone and it was very impressive, but I can't see the technology being practical for me. I prefer physical buttons.

Read the article for what it is before bitching. It's a simple side by side comparison of 3 phones based on their individual specs and builds. The comparisons are completely unbiased and allow for zero fanboyisms. What's the problem?

cygni wrote:I know the answer to this question!!!!
N95 has S60v3 FP1. C drive 256MB, OS were almost 100MB, so it leaves you 160MB.
N96 has S60v3 FP2. C drive 256MB, OS around 170MB, so it leaves you 80MB
N97 has S60v5. C drive 256MB, OS around 200MB, so it leaves you 50MB.

The problem is NOKIA is stupi*ly not upgrading the C drive size. And with current ADVANCE web browser in nokia phone and ever complex web site, the 50MB-80MB is really FAR THAN ENOUGH.

The current N97 mini, E72, X6, 5235_come_with_music has 512MB C drive.

The N95 was a super model but then Nokia did the same as with the N73 make a upgraded model the N95 8gb which is Still the Best Nokia mobile they have released,the N96 did not seem to impress alot of people because of the batterylife on it,the N97 was released to early an to oversized an thats what Nokia realised an released the Mini N97,but not eveyone like Touch Screen Mobiles as the job you have you can not use the mobile with damaging the mobile,the N86 was a bit of a let down from Nokia as the Speakers were wrongly placed an not loud enough an the N86 was a bit to heavy as well,they have all had good cameras on them but the N82 is still the Best camera mobile.just can"t wait to see what Nokia got lined up next a rumour the N87 next with a 12 mega-pixel camera on it with xenon flash hope it right,N95 8gb the Best

You make the 3D performance ont he N97 seem worse than it is. Following your description the phone will only handle 2D only by the sound of it.
However, I have 3D games on my N97 and they work fine.
Examples of games I have on my N97 now: One (NGage - 3D fighter), ToonWarz (Ovi - 3D first person shooter, touch controls, 16:9 display), Resident Evil Degeneration (NGage Trail - 3D third person shooter), System Rush Evolution (NGage Trail - 3D), Mega Monsters (NGage Trail- 3rd person perspective), Need for Speed Undercover (NGage Trail - 3D arcade racing)

So if the 3D is as bad as you say, how come all of these games work?
I think you need to rethink you statement on that matter Mr. Litchfield

Marc D. wrote:So if the 3D is as bad as you say, how come all of these games work? I think you need to rethink you statement on that matter Mr. Litchfield

It's rather outrageous how people think I write these things without researching them first. I've done numerous tests on numerous games, looking at frame rates, and the N97 is a factor of two down on the N96 and, in extreme cases, an order of magnitude down on the N95.

'3D' games will work, but slowly. Have you guys not SEEN Oval Racer working on the N95? it's stunning. And that was 2007 hardware.

Kazutoyo wrote:Wow, that's depressing. I mean, it's good that the newer drives got a 512MB C drive, but really, when the S60 3rd FP2 devices appeared and gave the user less than 100MB of free storage, at least someone in charge at Nokia should have been thinking "hmmm, this isn't enough, we need to give the devices more storage". But no, it took almost another 2 years for that to happen.

It seems to me that the enginer@nokia is using new phone/firmware all the time, so that they never had lots of apps/mail/MMS on the phone thus making the phone loosing that precious C drive.

I also think that Nokia using a "if it's not break, then it's OK" philosopy when developing their phone. Because no one (million user @ the same time) ever complaint by the lack of memory until the N97 launched so nokia didn't notice their mistake.

I use E61i at this momment and want to upgrade to the best E series as of now which is E72. Seeing the C memory only 512, and with current OS it only leave me 300MB+ make me wonder if Nokia seriously build this device to be the top of the line of E series.

First of all, I have a love hate situation with my E61i. I use this phone to retrive my business mail, and I want to retain as much mail as posible on the phone. If I put the mail on the C drive (default), my phone will be down on it's knees in no time. If I put on the memory card, I lost the ability to 'HOT SWAP'.

Then, the MMS. The MMS also took place on the C drive as default. And I do receive quite lots of MMS. Because Axis (my service provider) give all their user free 1000 MMS each month.

So.... go figure.... This whole situation make all the E series looks bad.

If ordinary joe was using nokia N97 phone with only 50MB-70MB and receive 1000MMS x 50kb = 50MB of MMS in a month... The phone can't be used for browsing anymore after 1 months.!!!!

So, nokia really need to read this!!!

I like the idea of this comparison, but there are serious problems that make it too subjective. The N95 is listed, but the N95 8GB, with its larger battery and reorganized memory layout is completely ignored. Same for the N97 mini. Several key improvements that came with N96 firmware updates are taken into account, but updated abilities of the N95 and N97 are again ignored. I'd also point out each device has design flaws (ie N96 slider rail problems) that need to be considered if one is thinking of buying an older device. I actually do agree with the premise that "newer is not always better," but this comparison is a bit too flawed for my taste.

Just updated my N95-3. I couldn't get the Nokia Device status app to install. Aside from that, all looks okay. Nice to see Nokia keeps their old HW current. I've looked at the N97 mini, E72 and N86 8MP and still want to keep my trusty old N95. Now when Nokia releases an N900 that works on ATT's 3G network, then maybe I'll switch.

traecer wrote:I like the idea of this comparison, but there are serious problems that make it too subjective. The N95 is listed, but the N95 8GB, with its larger battery and reorganized memory layout is completely ignored. Same for the N97 mini. Several key improvements that came with N96 firmware updates are taken into account, but updated abilities of the N95 and N97 are again ignored.

N95 8GB and N97 mini were left out partly for space reasons and partly because I wanted to look at the simple numeric progression. And also because I was simply trying to illustrate the point about older devices often out-performing newer ones.

I would agree that the N95 8GB and N97 mini are as good as, or better than one of both devices in a 5-wide table around them. As might be the N86. Hey, when Rafe lets me use a 2000 pixel wide table on the site.... 8-)

And I was considering all devices with latest firmware, so I did take into account all 'updated abilities'.

For those people having problem about n96, bragging that n95/8gb is better,,,,,,then smash ur own phone!

rvirga wrote:Well, after this I think we can safely amend Disraeli's rule: "there are four types of lies: lies, damn lies, statistics, and Litchfield's tables".
I've seen you using a table to trash the excellent HTC Pro 2, then do it again with the Hero. And let's not even talk about your smartphone comparison table. But this time you've really outdone yourself. To make an fetid turd like the N96 look better than both N95 and N97 takes special skills. Well done, sir! 😃

Genius.

rvirga, I salute you sir. 😃 😃 😃

Can somebody explain why the N97 doesn't use its 32 GB as 'main memory' or what's the point of having two internal separate 'main' (C drive) and 'storage' memory (E drive). Aren't both of them just NAND flash memory costing absolutely the same per MB? Why not just put 32GB of 'main' memory that can be used also for data storage as needed?

Same for the supplied memory cards that come in the box with many models. What's the point of including a 4GB memory card that can only be used for storage instead of 4GB of internal memory that can be used both for installing applications and data storage? If you want more memory you can buy a card by yourself at a later stage

Didn't the old Psion 5/5MX have a shared 4/8/16 MB of main/storage memory (also doubling as RAM)? Doesn't the iPhone have 16/32 GB of 'internal' memory (Flash) that can be used as needed for either installing applications or data storage

Clarifications welcome. I've done my best to search for an explanation online but to no avail.

Thanks

Unregistered wrote:Can somebody explain why the N97 doesn't use its 32 GB as 'main memory' or what's the point of having two internal separate 'main' (C drive) and 'storage' memory (E drive). Aren't both of them just NAND flash memory costing absolutely the same per MB? Why not just put 32GB of 'main' memory that can be used also for data storage as needed?

Same for the supplied memory cards that come in the box with many models. What's the point of including a 4GB memory card that can only be used for storage instead of 4GB of internal memory that can be used both for installing applications and data storage? If you want more memory you can buy a card by yourself at a later stage

Didn't the old Psion 5/5MX have a shared 4/8/16 MB of main/storage memory (also doubling as RAM)? Doesn't the iPhone have 16/32 GB of 'internal' memory (Flash) that can be used as needed for either installing applications or data storage

Clarifications welcome. I've done my best to search for an explanation online but to no avail.

Thanks

The C-drive in Nokia act as a Hard drive and also RAM. Whereas the other drive, such as the 32GB on the Nokia N97, or the 8GB on Nokia N97mini were just a plain storage, can't be used as RAM. The C drive is a Non Volatile RAM. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-volatile_random_access_memory. Whereas the 32GB or the 8GB is just a plain Flash memory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory

It's 2 different beast.

I think the comparison is a fair one and am quite suprised that the n96 has been so maligned over the last year or so. Maybe because it always seems to be just a bit under-powered...just not quite snappy enough...or that in every-day use it still has the habit of resetting itself once every couple of weeks. There is no getting away from it though, that in each of the categories where it has been marked green, it does equal or out-perform the other two. However, when you take each category on it's own, there is normally a better implementation on another phone out there somewhere. For this reason I see it as a Jack-of-all-trades phone, and while it is master-of-none, there are few (if any) phones out there which match it across the board.

Oh and BTW, of course reviews are subjective, that's the point. Everyone has different priorities for a phone and so there are many that disagree with the views of the reviewer...surely the approach to take is to find a reviewer that you generally agree with and then wait for them to review the phone(s) that you're interested in getting next. Why bother reading and then flaming a reviewer just because they haven't paid homage to the phone that you bought and think is the best. If you know so much about phones, write your own blog / column and see what comments that you get 😊

ILG

cygni wrote:The C-drive in Nokia act as a Hard drive and also RAM. Whereas the other drive, such as the 32GB on the Nokia N97, or the 8GB on Nokia N97mini were just a plain storage, can't be used as RAM. The C drive is a Non Volatile RAM. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-volatile_random_access_memory. Whereas the 32GB or the 8GB is just a plain Flash memory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory

It's 2 different beast.

Isn't RAM (volatile) the D-drive?

Unregistered wrote:Isn't RAM (volatile) the D-drive?

Hi,

Sorry... my mistake..
The C drive were NON FLASH memory, the D drive were NAND FLASH memory.

Here taken from Kingston web pages.

NOR, named after the specific data mapping technology (Not OR), is a high-speed Flash
technology. NOR Flash memory provides high-speed random-access capabilities, being able
to read and write data in specific locations in the memory without having to access the
memory in sequential mode. Unlike NAND Flash, NOR Flash allows the retrieval of data as
small as a single byte. NOR Flash excels in applications where data is randomly retrieved or
written. NOR is most often found built into cellular phones (to store the phone�s operating
system) and PDAs and is also used in computers to store the BIOS program that runs to
provide the start-up functionality

NAND Flash was invented after NOR Flash, and is named after the specific mapping
technology used for data (Not AND). NAND Flash memory reads and writes in high-speed,
sequential mode, handling data in small, block sizes (�pages�). NAND Flash can retrieve or
write data as single pages, but cannot retrieve individual bytes like NOR Flash.

NAND Flash memory is commonly found in solid-state hard drives, audio and video Flash
media devices, television set-top boxes, digital cameras, cell phones (for data storage) and
other devices where data is generally written or read sequentially.

For example, most digital cameras use NAND-Flash based digital film, as pictures are
usually taken and stored sequentially. NAND-Flash is also more efficient when pictures are
read back, as it transfers whole pages of data very quickly. As a sequential storage medium,
NAND Flash is ideal for data storage.

NAND Flash memory is less expensive than NOR Flash memory, and can accommodate
more storage capacity in the same die size.

I've had my n95 for almost 2 years and I'm still surprised sometimes over its technical brilliance. Camera is almost perfect, for the phone anyway. I never used n96 or n97 so can't make comparison, but I tryed a lot of others like sonyericsson and samsung newer models and I'd still choose n95. Only thing that have bothered me are stereo headphones I got with phone - they always fell out of my ears - not very cool design. As for the batteries, I got non-original replacment, but one must be carefull when buying non-originals! Mine is a quality german-japanise 1400mAh cell and it powers my phone for 3 days of havy use!
PS: I hear from some friends that some were very satisfied with n96 and that n97 was a disappointment for them. So far this is just rumor, but I'll check it out...
PS2: this is for the guy who wrote comment a bit drunk at 3AM: nevertheless your comment is very well balanced an true...
PS3: So I'd like to hear more opinion from those who used and have expirience with all 3 nokia models...

I currently have a N95-3 (850/1900MHz 3G) and am very happy with it, but as it is 2.5 years old, it is getting a bit tired, so I am looking at the N97mini to replace it.

For me the big issue is reception, here in Australia the N95 has Telstra's "Blue tick" for remote regional use, whereas the N97mini currently does not.
The N95 has fantastic reception, probably better than any other 850MHz 3G phone I have heard of - my question is how does the N97Mini compare????? or the N96 and N97 for that matter.

P.S. The performance/free RAM of the N95 on the chart is incorrect for all but the very first version of the N95 - the N95-2/3/4/5/6 all had double the amount of internal RAM (128MB instead of 64MB).