(Actually, Symbian's ownership and relationship with Nokia is complex. But let's gloss over that for now.)

Symbian was, for its time, a brilliant OS. It ran 3D games smoothly, had terrific hardware support, a decent ecosystem for developers. And it was bloody annoying for users.

Every few minutes, Symbian would interrupt you to ask "Are you sure you want this app to connect to the Internet?"

"Are you super sure that you want it to connect to a secure site?"

"Would you like me to try to remember your choice?"

On and on it went. And then, with great fanfare, Apple and Google disrupted them.

Apple's model was "We have a curated store of artisanal apps, each one backed up by a legal entity with a DUNS number. We check them so you don't have to. Everything on our store is trustworthy."

Ha!

Google's model was "We'll tell you what kind of crap this app will use. Don't like it? Don't use it! YOLO!"

That, of course, led to ostensibly harmless apps asking for ridiculously invasive permissions.

Because, as it turns out, a Libertarian free-for-all doesn't work. It requires rational people to have an educated understanding of the risks they face. Millions of people installed dodgy apps, saw the one-time prompt, and lost control of their data.

With the latest releases of Android and iOS, we're back to where we started. Both now prompt you the first time an app asks for access. Both give you regular reminders of which apps may be snaffling your data. Both let you manage access and selectively deny apps.

There are many (many!) reasons why Symbian lost the Great Mobile Wars. But it is somehow fitting to see the return of design decisions they made decades ago.

Nasty.

This is the price we pay for Android's open access policy. iPhone users can smirk all they want - but I like being able to run anything I desire on my phone, rather than be restricted to the puritanical walled garden of Apple's App Store.

The late lamented Symbian OS did many things wrong - but it had an interesting approach to keeping users secure from malicious apps.

The first time an app wanted to access a feature - like Internet, SMS, phonebook - the phone would prompt the user to grant the app permission.

Now, the Symbian model wasn't without flaws. It would often forget that you'd granted an app permission or repeatedly ask annoying questions.

Is this what is needed for Android? the first time an app tries to access, say, the dialer - should Android say "Are you sure you want Angry Birds to make a phone call?"

Or, should Android take a leaf out of BlackBerry 10? When installing the app, the user can choose whether to grant certain permissions.

Finally, what about personal responsibility? The Android permission model is quite opaque to most users, it's true, but there are some basic precautions users can take.

I was recently hit by a "drive by installation". A malicious website automatically downloaded an app to my Android phone. When I clicked on it to install, this is what I got:

If you think a Battery app needs all those permissions... I'm not sure encasing you in bubble-wrap is enough to keep you safe from yourself!

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Android needs to do more to allow users to enjoy their freedom.

Going down the Symbian path of insisting every app be signed by a third party and repetitively interrupting the user is probably not the right way to do things. What is clear from the current crop of malware is that simply telling the user of the permissions an app is requesting at installation time is insufficient.

Until Google makes things better for its users, it's worth installing an app like Permissions Denied which will allow you to see which apps have more access than they need - and restrict them if necessary.

While undoubtedly cool, what amuses me about this game is why it has taken the gaming world so long to catch up with Symbian! Way back in 2003, I got my hands on the Siemens SX1. It was the first non-Nokia handset to be running Symbian. As well as "modern" features like GPS, web browsing, and apps - it also came with a very interesting game.

Mozzies

Mozzies was an award winning Augmented Reality game. Perhaps the first of its kind to make it in to a mass market phone. I can't find any videos of it - so here are some screenshots. From a presentation by Andreas Jakl.

As you can see, not markedly different to the iPhone / Star Wars game. Sure, the graphics have come a long way - but it's still just tracking movement through the camera and accelerometer, and then painting shootable "baddies" on the screen.

Seven Year Itch

What annoys me about Symbian is that it has all these amazing and innovative features and then squanders them. I've never seen another Symbian handset with Mozzies on it. You'd think that an award winning game like that would be on every Symbian handset.

Another example. The N95 was technically superior to the original iPhone. Yet Nokia dragged its feet on using the camera accelerometer to power the screen rotation. Barely any updates came out for the the N95 series - any hope of using that as a platform to beat the onslaught on smartphones was wasted.

I don't know whether it's Symbian or Nokia or someone else who is to blame. What I do know is that Symbian has lost any technical lead it may have had. And that's desperately sad.

The Dark Side

In researching this blog post, I came across a delightfully disturbing tale of a young man who had his phone smashed for playing this game.

Heriyono said: 'I was so engrossed with the mosquitoes, I became oblivious to my surroundings.

'Then, I saw through the phone, a figure behind the swarm of mosquitoes heading in my direction but I thought he was just passing by.'

Heriyono claims the man then shouted: 'Trying to take a photo of my girlfriend, is it?'

And he smashed the phone on the floor.

I do wonder how many more phones will be destroyed when people think they are being used to take photos. Or how many photographers will use game playing as a cover?

Perhaps it's time to make a video app which merely looks like you're playing a game...?