In response to a recent survey telling us that schools are getting the teaching of Information Technology all wrong by not including “computer programs” in the syllabus, the BBC has offered up seven questions about computer programs. I urge you to take the quick quiz and then come back here when you’re done.

I scored five out of seven. I don’t know the correct HTML for inserting an image, and I couldn’t work out which subset of acronyms the question with GNU in it was driving at, mainly because the preceding five questions were not about “computer programs” at all; they were about the history of the people who happened to be involved in the invention of programming, either as a general concept (Jaquard) or as an incredibly early implementation (Hopper and COBOL).

I have to say – despite having earned a decent living for some time as a COBOL developer – I didn’t know Grace Hopper’s nickname and lucked out on that answer too, so really I should have scored a mere four. Knowing Admiral Hopper’s nickname wasn’t necessary to make my programs work or to earn me money, so I was in shameful ignorance, at least if you share the BBC’s perspective on the matter. To my mind, only two of the seven questions actually addressed the subject of the questionnaire.

I don’t ask that the guy who changes the oil on my Mercedes knows who Emil Jellinek was, because it’s not a necessary piece of information for him to do a good job

As you can probably guess, I regard this questionnaire as a terrible example of precisely the problem that the report is alluding to. Outside of the hallowed halls of hackerdom, almost nobody knows what size or shape the job of programming actually has, or how it should be thought about.

Of course, the “historian’s perspective” is one way to do it, but shouldn’t be confused with the artisan’s practical understanding of their tools. I don’t ask that the guy who changes the oil on my Mercedes knows who Emil Jellinek was, because it’s not a necessary piece of information for him to do a good job.

So the question rests with us: with the contributors and readers of PC Pro. Starting with readily available equipment (and personally I’d propose Free Pascal), what would you do to improve the comprehension of “programming”  - not only in schools, but in evidently confused and distant institutions such as the BBC?

The BBC has been one of the most vociferous defenders of net neutrality – the concept that all internet traffic is treated equally.  However, a couple of deals struck with BT suggest the BBC isn’t as wedded to net neutrality as it likes to claim.

What the BBC says

First, let’s recall what the BBC has said publicly about net neutrality and ISPs discriminating between different types of traffic in the past.

As recently as last October, the BBC’s director of future media and technology, Erik Huggers, wrote a landmark blog, outlining the Beeb’s stance on net neutrality.

“An emerging trend towards network operators discriminating in favour of certain traffic based on who provides it, as part of commercial arrangements, is a worrying development,” Huggers wrote.

“Why? For companies that can pay for prioritisation, their traffic will go in a special fast lane. But for those that don’t pay? Or can’t pay? By implication, their traffic will be de-prioritised and placed in the slow lane. Discriminating against traffic in this way would distort competition to the detriment of the public and the UK’s creative economy.

“The founding principle of the internet is that everyone – from individuals to global companies – has equal access. Since the beginning, the internet has been ‘neutral’, and everyone has been treated the same. But the emergence of fast and slow lanes allows broadband providers to effectively pick and choose what you see first and fastest.”

And lest we think this was Huggers shooting from the hip on a blog post, the BBC also submitted a response to Ofcom’s net neutrality consultation (PDF) last year, which arrived at the same conclusion.

“The BBC believes that traffic management should only be used at a minimum for technical and legal reasons. In our view, discriminating traffic by content provider or origin will distort competition and deviate from the end-to-end principle which is at the core of the internet.”

What the BBC does

Despite taking a rigid stance against discrimination between different content providers and internet “fast lanes”, the BBC appears fairly relaxed about the situation when it stands to benefit.

For example, content from the BBC iPlayer was used in a 2009 trial of BT Wholesale’s Content Connect service. Content Connect is BT’s new content distribution network (CDN), which effectively puts video content in the “fast lane”, ensuring customers get a smooth video stream from selected broadcasters.

In some ways, there’s nothing new about this: the BBC has worked with CDNs such as Akamai in the past, paying these companies to push video content closer to consumers and easing the burden on networks. However, there is a crucial difference: Akamai has no relationship with end users. BT, on the other hand, has stated publicly that it plans to charge both content providers and consumers for premium services delivered over Content Connect. As Huggers himself stated: “For those that don’t pay? Or can’t pay? By implication, their traffic will be de-prioritised and placed in the slow lane.”

The BBC told me that it “does not have a commercial relationship with BT Wholesale’s Content Connect service”. However, it most certainly does have a commercial relationship with BT Retail – the arm of BT that provides broadband to consumers, and which also delivers BBC iPlayer programmes over its BT Vision IPTV service. How does BT ensure those Vision video streams reach customers smoothly? By using Content Connect.

The BBC (nor any other broadcaster whose programmes are delivered over BT Vision) doesn’t currently pay BT to benefit from these “fast lane” streams. But there is no doubt that this arrangement gives the BBC a commercial advantage over rival broadcasters, who don’t have access to the fast lane. Especially as BT Vision sets aside a dedicated chunk of a customer’s bandwidth when streaming video, meaning someone else in the house trying to stream HD video on a laptop, for example, will likely suffer.

In other words, it’s exactly the “emergence of fast and slow lanes [that] allows broadband providers to effectively pick and choose what you see first and fastest” that Huggers railed against in last October’s blog.

The BBC’s response

When I asked the BBC to comment on this apparent contradiction between its support for net neutrality and its dealings with BT, a spokesman said: “We wish to make BBC iPlayer available over the open internet to platforms and devices on a fair basis, with the aim to ensure pay-TV customers also continue to enjoy a high-quality BBC iPlayer experience.  We keep all deals under review in light of BBC’s strategic priorities and policies, our commitment to an open internet and rapid market developments.”

I have some sympathy for the BBC: net neutrality is a hideously complex topic, and decisions made with the best interests of viewers in mind can sometimes compromise principles. But I’m fairly sure the BBC would be screaming from the rooftops if commercial broadcasters were being handed the kind of competitive advantage it’s currently benefiting from, and it was the BBC being left in the “slow lane”.

That’s changed with the release of an official iPlayer app. It’s potentially one of the biggest apps to ever hit the market, and it’s been released simultaneously with the iPad edition.

Boot up the app and it’s immediately obvious this is something special. Featured programmes sit at the top of the screen, and scrolling down sees more fade into view smoothly. Switch your phone around and you’re able to scroll horizontally through Auntie’s top content.

Click on a show and the familiar iPlayer layout appears, with options to share the the show over any social-networking apps you’ve got installed or add it to your favourites for later viewing. Graphics illustrate the programme’s channel, duration and availability on iPlayer, and there are eight links to recommend shows at the bottom of the screen – just scroll through them horizontally and click.

The Radio tab is designed along the same lines, with the latest shows, exclusive live performances and (for older listeners) episodes of The Archers available.

At the top of the app sits an unobtrusive little button that’s actually key to the iPlayer experience. Click it and you’re able to browse through numerous programme categories, from comedy and drama to sports and documentaries, as well as divide shows by their channels: all the main stations are supported alongside more obscure ones such as BBC Parliament, BBC Radio 1Xtra and BBC Radio 7.

And then there’s the live TV and radio options, which stream current content. None of iPlayer’s playback options work on 3G, but our office wireless network coped admirably, quickly streaming BBC at fine quality. While it’s not what you’d expect from the corporation’s HD channels – or, frankly, its SD broadcasting – it’s certainly watchable.

Some of the Beeb’s archived content, though, didn’t fare so well. Top at the time of writing was a David Attenborough documentary, Madagascar, which proved difficult to watch as the app kept stopping to buffer images. The latest episode of Panorama was the same. This could be down to increased launch demand peaks or a temporary glitch on our wireless network, but it’s a shame to see such an impressive app potentially scuppered by outside forces.

Official BBC apps have been a long time coming but, now the first has arrived, we’re still impressed: iPlayer mimics its desktop cousin superbly and – when your wireless connection plays ball – offers a smooth and responsive experience. It’s free and available in the Android Market right now as long as you’re running Android 2.2 or above.

Want more great Android apps? Check out our previous Android Apps of the Week or read our 36 Best Android Apps feature.

“I’m not interested in  any Steady Eddies or Cautious Carols,” barks Lord Sugar at the start of this week’s Apprentice – indeed, it’s Blundering Bordans that Amstrad Alan’s keen on.

The Bordan in question is Bordan Tkachuk, the CEO of computer firm Viglen, and one of the “trusted associates” dragged in to grill Sugar’s Apprentice candidates. Being the boss of a computer firm, Sugar naturally wants him to test out the technical acumen of Stuart Baggs – a hideous genetic blend of David Brent, Christopher Biggins and a cheap Burton’s suit.

Stuart “The Brand” Baggs runs his own ISP on the Isle of Man, and eagle-eyed Bordan’s spotted something iffy on his CV. Baggs claims he’s running a “fully licensed telecoms company”, but Bordan’s been on the blower to the Isle of Man authorities and found out that he only has a licence for broadband.

“Stuart you’re blagging to me,” said Tkachuk, cornering his prey. “I know what an ISP is. It’s an Internet Service Protocol.”

Erm… not last time I checked it wasn’t.  And given that Tkachuk’s “been running Alan Sugar’s companies for nearly the past 25 years” and so boasts that he knows “a little bit about technology”, he should know that P stands for provider not protocol.

Never mind. Anyone’s allowed a slip of the tongue, especially when they’re verbally beating up on the most irritating thing on television since Noel’s Christmas Presents.  Let’s move to the boardroom, where Bordan’s giving his feedback on Baggs to an expectant Lord Sugar of Brentwood.  “He says he has a telecoms licence on the Isle of Man,” snorts Tkachuk, with the Columbo-like flourish of a detective who has his suspect banged to rights.  “What he had was just a very simple broadcom licence.”

Broadcom? Broadcom? Either Viglen’s just invented an entirely new telecommunications protocol (Bordan’s keen on those after all), or Sugar’s technical lieutenant hasn’t got a chuffing clue what he’s talking about.

Sugar takes this news badly. Very badly indeed. He’d previously believed Baggs’ boasts of setting up his own broadband firm by the age of 21 – now it turns out he’s merely running an Internet Service Protocol with a broadcom licence. This young scallywag’s a fraud!

“My guy is not a mug,” said Sugar of Tkachuk. “You’re full of sh*t,”  before ordering Baggs to pack his, well, bags.

As my colleague Alex Watson sagely noted during the show on Twitter: “Given the quality of Sugar’s technical advisers, you can see where the em@iler came from.” Quite.

It sounds terrible, especially given that the money comes from the public via the licence fee, but when, or if, you stop to think about it – that actually represents less one and a half laptops a week.

Careless? Yes, but hardly a big surprise given that the Beeb employs 23,000 members of staff, often on the move and working unconventional hours. OK, they don’t all carry laptops or other portable devices, but it’s fair to assume that a good chunk of them have a laptop and at least a BlackBerry.

To put that in perspective, the British Computer Society compiled figures three years ago looking to benchmark the normal level of laptop loss and theft among companies. It found that laptop loss ranged between 20 and 40 machines per thousand in a year.

Even at the bottom end of that estimate, and assuming only 5,000 BBC staff carry a laptop, that would equate to 200 in two years, which is well below what the BBC is being castigated for in reports. In fact, I’ve personally lost almost as many pieces of hardware on various late-night commutes and taxi-rides.

Now I’m no apologist for BBC staffers treating their publicly-funded hardware with reckless abandon, but there is a case for putting this story in a hall of fame for gratuitous product plugging by street-savvy PR shenanigans

The revelations came out after a Freedom of Information Act request, not from a journalist or newspaper, but from a software security company, Absolute Software, which (wait for it) sells a security service for tracking down laptops when they have been stolen.

The company, in a press release issued earlier today, took the BBC to task over the fact that only 19 pieces of the lost hardware had been recovered by the corporation, although the BBC said 15 laptops, three mobiles and one BlackBerry were recovered and that whenever a suspected theft or loss was reported, “data security breach procedures” were invoked as necessary.

“It’s arguable whether BBC laptops are in fact ‘appropriately’ protected – the sheer number of devices that were lost or stolen and not recovered would suggest the opposite,” said Absolute Software’s Dave Everitt . “The BBC would do well to ensure they are using the technology that’s already installed in most laptops to track such stolen devices as well as smartphones and recover them, or at least render them impossible for others to use.“

Fine sentiments no doubt, but if I was running the security side of a corporate mobile strategy I’d be super cautious of a company that would run so quickly to the media, and trade so ruthlessly and publicly on the misfortune of another organisation that probably isn’t performing any worse than the industry average.

Quite how the BBC is paying so much for its laptops – £1,500 a piece, according to the research – is another matter altogether.

Since the Monaco Grand Prix a fortnight ago, F1 presenter Jake Humphrey has traded in his normal clipboard for the Apple tablet. Now whenever Jake’s on screen, he’s seen brandishing the iPad, with the Apple logo embossed on the back of the device being beamed to millions of viewers worldwide.

The BBC has strict rules on product placement. Everything from the brand name of “sticky-back plastic” on Blue Peter to the carefully masked food labels on Masterchef are expertly concealed. Admittedly, it might seem a bit rich complaining about branding in F1 coverage, where the cars are smothered in sponsors’ logos, but that’s entirely beyond the BBC’s control. Should it really be allowing its presenters to wield the iPad, with no effort at all being made to conceal its identity?

I’m clearly not the only person to have spotted Humphrey’s shiny new toy. In his latest Behind The Scenes video blog, he answers viewer questions on why he’s using the iPad – although deliberately avoids mentioning it by name, lest anyone work out what this mysterious new giant iPhone is.

“The reason I use this is because I think it’s the new way of working on television,” said Humphrey, while demonstrating that it’s now used to store his script and keep him up to date with the latest tweets from F1 viewers.

A BBC spokesperson issued a similar line when we asked them if the use of the iPad constituted product placement. “This product was chosen as it provided the most appropriate technology for the job – enabling Jake to update twitter and emails live on air, and view his script and all the information he needs online in one place,” a spokesperson said.

That’s all well and good, and I honestly can’t think of a device better suited to that purpose (although I hope he’s got the clipboard on standby in case the iPad fails, or else we’ll have to listen to more of Eddie Jordan’s drivel). But is it too much to ask for the BBC to pop a strip of masking tape over the Apple logo, and treat the iPad in the same manner as the tub of Flora on Ready Steady Cook?

“How you can possibly enforce that?” asked the BBC man, somewhere in between the 96 daily reminders of how you can watch BBC News online. “We can and we will,” was the gist of the not particularly convincing reply. Still, it’s nice to see that, just as small businesses are putting the worst of the recession flames out, TV Licensing wants to open another can of petrol.

But why pick on small businesses? During his convoluted explanation of what you can and can’t do, the enforcer explained that you don’t need to buy a licence to watch BBC programmes on iPlayer after they are broadcast.

Can someone explain the logic of that to me? A small businessman that wants to watch Sky News during his lunch break has to pay £140 for the privilege, even though Sky (or any other commercial broadcaster) doesn’t see a penny of the licence revenue. Meanwhile, someone who wants to cherry pick the best of the BBC’s output and watch the HD streams on iPlayer can do so with impunity.

I can’t see any good reason why iPlayer viewers should be exempt from the TV licence just because they’re not watching it live. The programmes still cost the same to produce; in fact, they cost even more when you consider the bandwidth fees and other costs associated with maintaining the iPlayer.

If TV Licensing is so desperate for money that it needs to apply the thumbscrews on small businesses, perhaps it should tackle the iPlayer freeloaders first.

BT Option 1 isn’t the worst service when it comes to strangling connections, however. Not by a long chalk. Take BT-owned PlusNet example. Its “Unlimited” account offers a maximum bandwidth of only 256Kbits/sec from download sites during peak hours (6pm-11pm) while peer-to-peer traffic is granted a paltry maximum of 128Kbits/sec from 6pm-10pm. Try downloading a 1.5GB HD show from iPlayer during peak hours on that connection and it will probably arrive a couple of hours after you’ve gone to bed.

Other ISPs pull similar ruses (you can find out what your ISP is up to in this month’s mag). Perhaps now the BBC has taken an interest, we’ll get a frank and open debate about the murky practice of traffic shaping.

Since the dark days of November 2007, I’m pleased to say the iPlayer has improved almost beyond recognition. The website interface is now much cleaner and finding the particular episode of a series that you want to watch is no longer a case of randomly clicking on identical boxes and hoping for the best. Shows can now be streamed in either standard or “high-quality” versions if you can’t be bothered to wait for the download (although downloads still offers much greater picture quality), and devices such as media players, games consoles and phones are now well supported with dedicated downloads.   

If the truth be told, the BBC has turned what was looking like a multi-million lame duck into one of the most popular internet services this country has ever seen – and deserves credit for doing so.

Which makes it all the more galling that the next evolution of the iPlayer looks set to undo much of the good work.

Early next year, the BBC will replace the current iPlayer with a cross-platform version based on Adobe’s AIR platform. That good news is that this will make it easier for Macs and Linux users to use the iPlayer, and will also include new content such as HD video and podcasts. Although it will almost certainly mean we pick up the tab with more expensive broadband tariffs, as ISPs pass on the costs of the extra bandwidth required for a service that already accounts for around 10% of all UK internet traffic at peak hours.

The BBC also plans to hop needlessly on to the social networking bandwagon, in what iPlayer chief Anthony Rose is already painfully describing as “Broadcast 2.0”. This means the iPlayer will be turned into a pseudo-Facebook, with viewers able to see what their friends are watching, “chat” about shows as they watch them, and rate shows – or even parts of shows – they’ve watched. “Next year, it’s your friends who are going to choose what you watch,” Rose claims. Give me strength.

Worse still, the iPlayer’s going to start nagging you to watch shows. “You’ll see a System Tray pop-up: Top Gear, next episode now out,” Rose proudly proclaims in today’s Guardian, seemingly unaware that even Microsoft has decided that pop-up bubbles from the System Tray are more irritating  than re-runs of Holby City, and dumped them for Windows 7.

Having transformed the iPlayer into an invaluable public service, the BBC looks set to break the golden rule of fixing something that now isn’t broken.  

The BBC’s Where To Get iPlayer page suggests getting the service to run on any MCE (or Home Media Hub as the Beeb calls them) should be a piece of cake. Simply download the programmes as normal on your PC, open Windows Media Center and add the iPlayer downloads folder to your Media Center library, then jump on to your MCE device and simply play back the relevant files from the comfort of your TV. Robert is your dad’s brother.

Except it doesn’t work on the Xbox 360. Well, at least not my Xbox 360, nor those of a couple of colleagues I’ve spoken to. Although judging by numerous internet forums, it seems to work flawlessly for some people. When I click on downloaded programmes using the Xbox 360’s MCE, however, I’m presented with a blue screen displaying the message:

“Video Error. Files needed to display video are not installed or not working correctly.”

This is, of course, complete bunkum. Other, non-DRM protected videos stream perfectly happily from my Vista laptop to the Xbox 360 MCE. It’s only those pesky iPlayer files that produce the error message.

So I’ve found a couple of ways around the problem. The first is a doddle. Instead of choosing the Download To Computer option from the iPlayer service, go for Download For Media Players. This bypasses the iPlayer App on your PC and simply downloads the video like any other file. Save the video to a folder that’s monitored by your Xbox MCE (the default Videos folder should work fine) and it plays back perfectly.

The problem with choosing the Media Player files is that they are designed for portable players, so the video is heavily compressed. Even on my relatively modest 28in screen in the lounge, the picture quality is horribly patchy.

So, with the help of a couple of internet forums, I’ve found a way to watch the higher quality Computer downloads on the Xbox. Here’s how you do it:

1.  Make sure you have Windows Media Player 11 downloaded on your PC.

2. In Windows Media Player, click Library | Media Sharing and make sure that it’s set up to share video with your Xbox 360.

3. Download the programme of your choice using the Download To Computer option from the iPlayer website.

4. Once it’s downloaded, play the programme for a few seconds in the iPlayer app on your PC so that the appropriate DRM licence is downloaded (make sure you play past the BBC ident, or the licence won’t be downloaded).

5. Now for the bizarre part. Make a copy of the programme you’ve just downloaded (you will find it in C:\Users\Public\Videos\My Deliveries on a Vista PC) and plonk it in your Videos folder (or any other folder monitored by your MCE).  Now rename it to something a little more friendly – the iPlayer downloads are given hideously long filenames by default.

6. Navigate to the folder you just copied the video to on your Xbox 360 MCE, and the video should play.

7. The video will be in the old-school 4:3 format, but if you click on the X button on the Xbox 360 controller and select the Zoom option, you can fill the screen.  Whilst not quite Sky+ quality, the video is perfectly watchable.

So there you have it, the iPlayer on the Xbox 360 – albeit with a little bit of faffing around. I’d be interested to hear your experience of watching the iPlayer on the Xbox 360, particularly if you can get it to work without the seven-step procedure outlined above. One theory I’ve seen floated on forums is that it works flawlessly with Windows XP MCE PCs but not Vista. Let me know your thoughts on the comments below.