The Guardian has a write-up of the beta version of the BBC's iPlayer. This is the long awaited application from the BBC that enables on demand viewing of its television programmes. The review includes a quote resulting from the often ignored issue of seamless integration:

But navigation, awkwardly, switches between several different windows: the web pages for browsing the catalogue and downloading, your desktop-based library for looking through the programmes you've downloaded and a pop-up window when you actually watch.

Or, to put it another way: why has esteemed web designer Jeffrey Zeldman switched to using the productivity applications that come bundled with Mac OS X? Because of the iPhone. Specifically:

For many consumers, convenience is of greater value than choice. A platform built of parts that work together seamlessly beats a self-curated collection of apps that don’t.

When Apple introduced the iTunes [Music] Store in April 2003, and video in October 2005, Apple made the correct decision to incorporate the cumulative functionality within one consistent interface: iTunes. The reason the iPlayer doesn't follow this model is because its developers have used technology provided by third parties: both the downloader (via Kontiki) and the viewer (Windows Media Player) are outside of the BBC's control. It's unfortunately a tacky solution.

Obviously one shouldn't expect a broadcasting company to spend time and (public) money on developing a unique experimental integrated solution. But this insistence that broadcasters have of 'doing their own thing' is bizarre. Channel 4, 5 and Sky also have on demand systems, similarly engineered. It's stupid.

Instead, the BBC should have taken a more radical approach and ditched the iPlayer.

And signed up with the iTunes Store.