This perhaps explains why the N96 was "launched" alongside the N79 and N85, it was the N96-3 which they were really announcing.

Among the extra features of the N96-3: DVB-H 1.0.
Does this make any sense for a headset targeted for the Americas? They could have removed DVB-H, and maybe used the space left for a beefier battery.

May be worth noting the CPU difference between the N95. They need to release the specs for the N85 soon.

N96
CPU:
Dual CPU
CPU Type: ARM 9
CPU Clock Rate: 264 MHz

N95
CPU:
Dual CPU
CPU Type: ARM 11
CPU Clock Rate: 332 MHz
3D Graphics HW Accelerator

I would wait for actual performance benchmarks rather than making judgements based on hardware alone.

I've got a 5320 and an N95, and the 5320 is a LOT faster to use despite having a similar/inferior CPU. The N95 takes time to launch its built-in apps, while the 5320 launches them instantly. I assume this is because of the 5320's newer OS version, and its much larger amount of RAM.


It may be a case of Nokia trying to jumpstart the Americas DVB-H market by providing compatible hardware, perhaps as part of some agreement with other companies.

Trying to create new broadcast standards is always a chicken-and-egg situation. HDTVs went on sale even in countries where there weren't any HD services yet, because both manufacturers and broadcasters wanted to jumpstart the market for HD technology and content. I'm sure it was the same when colour TV started too...

Incidentally, it seems that there are at least some DVB-H services and/or trials in both North and South America:

http://www.dvb-h.org/services.htm

Actually the 5320 has a faster processor than the N95 - 369mhz vs 330mhz. So that's why the 5320 is quicker to respond. My 6120, with 369mhz processor and only 64mb RAM, is quicker than my N95-8GB which has a 330mhz and 128mb RAM. The RAM makes no difference to the speed - it's the processor that counts for it all.