Problem with the article
"There's no alternative to YouTube, iTunes is hardly comparable, so iPhone users will have to download Google's client or just find something better to do than watch cats falling on pianos."
No alternative except Vimeo, DailyMotion, or the like, though admittedly they are for alternative video sharing services. I would also imagine that without an client iOS for iPhone/iPod, would Youtube's service have ended up defaulting to play HTML5 in the browser like iOS for iPad, This could be considered an alternative to a Youtube app, And of "iTunes is hardly comparable". iTunes is a store front, not a video sharing service. It was never intended so a video sharing service so of course it isn't comparable. Suggesting they should be is like suggesting a shirt and keys are comparable. Sure you want both items but for different reasons. You can rent and buy movies and TV shows from the iTunes store front but that does not make it a video sharing service. By the same token, you can rent Troma movies from Youtube (sorta like OnDemand) but it really isn't a store yet.
Also as someone noted it's not really being slipped in through the back door. It being an app for jailbroken iOS devices would be the back door. It just not sold with the interior anymore.