Eh, not really. Symbian was right for the wrong reasons. They were right to warn users about apps using internet access, but they were wrong about the reason -

Eh, not really. Symbian was right for the wrong reasons. They were right to warn users about apps using internet access, but they were wrong about the reason - it was about data caps, not privacy or security. Data caps mattered in that era, so from a narrow point of view it was the smart thing to offer those features. But to launch a category defining smartphone, that limitation needed to be broken entirely, and that involves work outside of software; namely, timing the launch such that you can negotiate with AT&T to ease the data restriction. It's like saying RealPlayer 'won' against YouTube. No, they didn't. They just mistimed an idea, and a few implementation details were the same. I've written more about this type of dynamic here: https://nickpunt.com/blog/category-defining-products/ https://nickpunt.com/blog/category-defining-products/