[Brekkie]

Straying way off topic here but if it was just "4" it would make sense to me, it's the "Channel" bit that annoys, especially as up until the last few years Channel 4 was rarely referred to as "Channel 4" on screen - shows were usually promoted as "on 4".

I've a feeling the prototype on demand service (which I think used a similar overnight recording technology to Top Up TV) might have been called BBC+, but looking for that it seems a few years ago they were going to launch a more personalised app called BBC+ for discovering BBC content but it clearly didn't go anywhere.

www.bbc.co.uk 

BBC Blogs - About the BBC - Introducing the new BBC+ app
Executive Editor, BBC Homepage, Clare Hudson, introduces a new app to the BBC po…
  Source: www.bbc.co.uk

[orange]

I think without being dismissive we can look at some interesting routes here. I feel like iPlayer is a strong brand and rebranding isn’t necessary at the moment - but I really doubt if they did do something with it that it would be as catastrophic as we’re seemingly making out. I do get it though - if it’s not broke why fix it.

The iPlayer branding as it is right now is quite solid - the pink play button is smart, and I think if they were going to do something with the name that it would be especially fine if they carried the existing icon over. There’s some flexibility in the brand that way.

[Scrotnig]

Everyone would still call it iPlayer though.
A rebrand is not a successful one if customers still use the old name. It’s a bit of a legacy name but it still works.

It would also generate negative publicity over spending more money on rebrands, at a time when the BBC is under scrutiny over costs.

[i.h]

Regarding the channel 4 "debate", it's telling that Ch4 themselves have cracked jokes about the name in relation to another perhaps flawed rebranding

twitter.com 

People still call our streaming service 4OD so good luck

[bilky asko]

It's future proof and rather clever, the way I see it

It treats the streaming and the channel the same way, but of course everybody knows what they're watching.

It's not that confusing, especially as channels just mention "stream it now".
So on E4 you don't get "watch it on C4", and it doesn't take much to understand that E4 and More4 are core Channel 4 brands

You don't watch Channel 4's on-demand content by opening up the dialling pad and pressing 4 on your phone, where as BBC iPlayer is still as interactive as ever.

[Steve in Pudsey]

One argument against just calling iPlayer "BBC" is that it includes S4C's content.

[Pete]

I've a feeling the prototype on demand service (which I think used a similar overnight recording technology to Top Up TV) might have been called BBC+, but looking for that it seems a few years ago they were going to launch a more personalised app called BBC+ for discovering BBC content but it clearly didn't go anywhere.

the prototype for iPlayer was called iMP (interactive media player).

BBC+ i have zero recollection of so that obviously lasted all of ten seconds.

[Mike]

the prototype for iPlayer was called iMP (interactive media player).

BBC+ i have zero recollection of so that obviously lasted all of ten seconds.

and what a UI it had
de8as167a043l.cloudfront.net 

Weirdly reminds me of the very early BBC iPlayer desktop app that used WMP and their own DRM to play back downloaded programmes.

[cable]

Looks like the Top Up TV like service was only a trial www.bbc.co.uk 

BBC - Press Office - BBC trials "Push-VoD" technology
Press Releases
  Source: www.bbc.co.uk

digital-lifestyles.info 

BBC Push-VOD Trial: The Story Is The Interactivity – Digital-Lifestyles
Skip to content Digital-Lifestyles We reported the effects of Technology on the …
  Source: digital-lifestyles.info

[ViridianFan]

Everyone would still call it iPlayer though.
A rebrand is not a successful one if customers still use the old name. It’s a bit of a legacy name but it still works.

It would also generate negative publicity over spending more money on rebrands, at a time when the BBC is under scrutiny over costs.

There countless examples of where companies and products have changed names and they’re still called by the old name. The one that always jumps to mind is opal fruits.

Up until the recent merger, my mum still referred to the news channel as news 24. It’s only now she refers to it as “what was news 24 till they messed about with it.”

I agree with others about naming two products or service the same thing. It’s one thing which always bugged me about the news24 rebrand to just bbc news as then you have to start adding the word channel to distinguish it from the bulletins.

It goes back to this theory I have that these design companies think the public are thick which is why the buzz phrase at the moment seems to be “joining the dots” as if the public are unable to tell already.

The i in iplayer is a legacy from the BBCi days which was the umbrella branding for anything “interactive” such as the website and the red button. I have to say I like the use of bbci, I think the homepage in the bbci whilst dated now actually looked so much better than the home page now. I’ll be even more controversial and say I think it’s a shame in one way sounds was an i[NAME]. I don’t know what you’d put in there.