BBC Offers iPhone Version of iPlayer, Accessible to Linux Users Too

smallfries writes "After a long battle with Linux users in the UK, the BBC was forced into releasing a flash version of the iPlayer streaming service to fulfill their obligations to license-fee payers. After claiming that development of Linux and Mac versions of the iPlayer would take two years, Auntie Beeb has rushed to support the iPhone. iPhone users 'can be trusted' because their platform is locked down ... so the beeb opened a non-DRM hole in the iPlayer to support them. This was guarded by the extreme security of User Agent strings! Long story short, Linux and Mac users have made their own non-DRM, non-Microsoft platform from firebug and wget. UK users can now watch (and keep) their favorite BBC shows."

How long?

[pipatron]

And how long will this stay?

Nokia E65

[tsa]

I have a Nolia E65. Can I have an iPlayer for my phone? What makes the iPhone more special than my E65 which can do more out of the box, is smaller and cheaper and isn't crippled?

Can we please stop hearing about the iPhone?

Re:Nokia E65

[goatpunch]

Apple products are intrinsicly 'cool' and there's nothing you can do to change that, in the same way that smoking will always be cool, no matter how many more sensible things you could be doing with your time and money.

Re:Nokia E65

[MightyYar]

If you are happy with the E65, then you probably aren't in the market for an iPhone. Tiny screen, standard phone keypad - it's more of a standard phone than the iPhone. For web browsing, watching movies/music, or typing emails, it's not as useful. On the other hand, it's probably a better telephone.

For the record, I'm more in the E65 demographic. The iPhone doesn't really get my juices flowing - but I can see the appeal.

Re:hooray....

[d3ac0n]

the BBC hasn't been a reputable news source to any honest observer for years now. Here's another sample of journalistic malfeasance by BBC news: http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=12 [camera.org]

Of course, the general attitudes and biases of the News org tends to generally filter out to the rest of the organization as well.

Feel free to peruse some of the articles here; http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] or here; http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=26019_Outrage-_BBC_Employs_Hamas_Terrorist&only [littlegreenfootballs.com] or here; http://michellemalkin.com/category/bbc/ [michellemalkin.com]

Re:Why did the iPhone 'force' the BBCs hand?

[dangitman]

That's absolutely retarded. Apple paid off the BBC because they are using MP4? That's not an Apple format, it's a freaking standard! It's supported everywhere, not just in Quicktime.

Re:Flash sucks.

[blhack]

Flash is great because its standard.

Nearly every graphics based browser out there can (and does) support flash. This is great because of the huge online video craze going on right now. Do you remember the days of some websites using quicktime, others using real player, some using windows media, some just streaming MPGs etc? Have you ever tried getting mplayer to actually PLAY all of those things in your browser?

Streaming video (and audio) using flash is great because it just works.

Re:iLawsuit

[Delkster]

A little computer that isn't much of a computer due to the lock-down. Just a fancy-looking phone, perhaps with a couple more applications than in other non-smartphones.

Unacceptable.

[Xest]

As a UK TV license payer I find it entirely unacceptable that the BBC is using our money to further Apple's profits over other companies by releasing only for their mobile handset. We do not pay the BBC to further Apple and Microsoft's profits, whilst I applaud their attempts at getting the content accessible for Linux users it's a half-assed measure at best.

Whilst the iPhone is popular in the US, it's not that popular here in the UK and as such there is not even the excuse that it's got a large majority of the market segment.

The BBC seems too easily influenced by large corporations and frankly, something needs to be done about it because they are accountable to us - the British citizens that pay the license equally and as such we should be treated equally in how we can access our content. If this is not to be the case, we should have the choice of using our TVs but not watching the BBC and hence opt out of the TV license.

Re:How long?

[WombatDeath]

That would be a reasonable position if their content wasn't already being 'redistributed' all over the place. Back in reality, they're pissing off Linux users in exchange for a piracy reduction of zero per cent.

On the plus side, they can at least claim to be preventing 'redistribution' and people who don't understand the technology will believe them.

Re:Flash sucks.

[ksheff]

but many sites often require you to have the latest & greatest version of flash to watch their little movies when previous versions would otherwise work just fine. This can pose a problem for some users when Adobe doesn't bring out new versions of flash for all platforms at the same time. Another thing I don't like about flash is that when you have multiple web pages open in multiple tabs, the stupid flash ads on each page are still running even though they aren't being viewed. I'm not sure if there is a Firefox extension or plugin to disable this feature or not. All the flash animations running at the same time really suck up a lot of cpu processing. At times, this can make the browser and everything else unusable.

Re:hooray....

[value_added]

the BBC hasn't been a reputable news source to any honest observer for years now ... Of course, the general attitudes and biases of the News org tends to generally filter out to the rest of the organization as well.

A biased comment from a person complaining of a perceived bias in another. LOL.

I do wish all you bias whiners would get a grip and move on to something more productive. It's gotten old and uninteresting, and less funny than a Slashdot meme. Moreover, it suggests that you put whatever critical thinking skill you have in the services of evangelising a knee-jerk political rant, rather than taking the information provided to you in a newspaper, a radio or television broadcast and putting it real use.

As far as news organisations go, I'd put the BBC near the top of the list (where most others in the developed and undeveloped world would put it). For me, it stands right beside papers like The New York Times. Hell, I'd even include NPR and The Wall Street Journal on the same list without batting an eye. I also read the editorials and letters, especially from people whose opinions differ from mine. I'd like to think that it's the issues themselves that are most important, and understanding different perspectives on them is an integral part of making sense of them.

Bias? Maybe. Maybe not. All humans have them, and we're all human. In the end, it's up to the individual to decide what the appropriate action (or in your case, reaction) should be. Here's a tip: there has never been a "story" told, or could be told, in its entirety. Cut some slack to someone trying to present a part of it, especially someone of the caliber of the BBC.

You're wrong, I have the real reason

[Nicolas MONNET]

1. BBC top executive got himself an iPhone for Christmas/hannukah/birthday/other.
   
2. Wanted to show off BBC programs on it to his mistress/golf buddy/dominatrix/beer buddy.
   
3. Proceeded to yell at subordinate in charge of streaming when not possible
   
4. Big ass hole drilled in no time in the DMR wall.
   

Re:iLawsuit

[2nd Post!]

You're too cynical. For many people, a computer is something to browse the web, check your email, take a few notes, watch YouTube, some movie trailers, listen to music, check the weather, and some stock prices. For those people, the iPhone is a perfect "little computer". If you think of a computer as something to write term papers on, analyze large datasets, develop software, or control robots, the iPhone is a horrible computer.

So for the people who love the iPhone, it's a perfect "little computer" with phone functionality. For people who don't see that, well, it means they want more out of the iPhone, first, I think.

Re:How long?

[datajack]

The BBC are in a difficult position with this, do they go to the cost/length of supporting that 0.8% of the market?

Sorry, you have lost me. Which platform has 0.8% of the market .. Linux or iPhone?

If you are seriously suggesting that the iPhone has a larger user-base than Linux, can you tell me what it is you are smoking please?

Re:Unacceptable.

[satellite17]

I can understand your point of view, but I have to say that as a licence payer who also owns an iPod touch I'm pretty happy about this. I suspect that this is an experiment in how to deliver high quality video to mobile devices and it won't be long before the service is opened up to other MPEG4 enabled devices.

Your point about the licence fee and different ways of accessing content is correct, we should be treated equally, regardless of OS / Browser / Device. Having said that I'm happy to cut the BBC a little slack in this. It's only been in the last couple of years that non techies have been able to access this kind of media on anything other than a TV and at least the BBC have recognised that internet distribution is the future (unlike the majority of the media industry who still seem to have their heads buried in the sand).

iPlayer is far from perfect but it's a step in the right direction and as my father is fond of saying "Rome wasn't built in a day". If we get to 2009 the only supported platforms are owned by MS and Apple then I'll give you a shout and we can storm Television Centre and start the revolution ourselves.

Re:How long?

[grahamm]

It doesn't weaken their position. The BBC have always been very up front in saying that they are having difficulty allowing Linux users to download tv shows in the same way that they allow Windows users because only on Windows are they able to ensure that the video is not redistributed.

And what they, and most other broadcasters forget, is that they have already broadcast the show in DRM free digital format. So anyone with a PVR which can transfer files to a computer, as the better ones can, is able to (illegally) redistribute it. So putting DRM on the 'download later' files is like bolting the stable door after the horse has bolted.

There is a problem with that.

[jotaeleemeese]

Anybody using other phones in the UK have paid (in a compulsory fashion mind you) the BBC license fee.

The BBC can't you say "we will support the cool phone, the rest be damned", specially when this phone is not even the market leader!

Somebody in the BBC needs to be called to task. The role of the BBC should be to ensure *all* license payers can access their services, this is best achieved by using open standards.

The BBC playing to the fiddle of MS, Apple or any other company in detriment of the people that actually pays their wages is completely unacceptable.

Re:Real Irony

[rubberglove]

um, I know you're trolling, but of course the number of iPhone users will vastly exceed the number of Linux users in their web statistics...
That's the point of the article!

I know it's short on details, but as I understand it, Linux (or other) users will be able to pull DRM-free content by telling their browser to identify itself as an iPhone.
So the real irony might be that if enough people want the content free of DRM, their web logs may eventually show a huge number of 'iPhone users'.