Steve Jobs Awarded Posthumous Grammy

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Steve Jobs Awarded Posthumous Grammy

Posted by Unknown on Wednesday February 15, 2012 @05:03AM from the unreleased-jobs-dubstep-record-out-next-week dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Recognizing Steve Jobs's immense contribution to music, he was the recipient of the Grammy Trustees Award at the Grammy's this past Sunday. The award is handed out annually to 'individuals who, during their careers in music, have made significant contributions, other than performance, to the field of recording.'" Eddy Cue, head of iTunes, accepted the Grammy in place of Jobs.

176 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Sigh by Wolfling1 · 2012-02-15 05:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

What a crock. Did we expect any better from the music industry?
1. Re:Sigh by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · 2012-02-15 05:08 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Its really amazing that they actually gave it to him. The RIAA sort of hates him for making their product more reasonably priced. I pay less now for an album ( on amazon, but itunes if you like) than I did 20 years ago, not accounting for inflation.
  
  --
  Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
2. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:08 · Score: 0
  
  The answer is yeah, we did.
3. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:08 · Score: 0
  
  What a crock. Did we expect any better from the music industry?
  WTF are you talking about?!?!
  They did give a Heavy Metal Grammy to my favorite metal act: Jethro Tull.
4. Re:Sigh by paimin · 2012-02-15 05:12 · Score: 0
  
  How is it a crock? Perhaps his contributions to the recording industry were negative or damaging, but it's absurd to argue they weren't significant.
  
  --
  Facebook is the new AOL
5. Re:Sigh by poena.dare · 2012-02-15 05:14 · Score: 1, Offtopic
  
  Today: "Yeah, Steve screwed us, but at least he didn't post the video on YouTube."
  2050: "The MPAA and RIAA led the fight to make media cheaper and more accessible worldwide."
  Come to think of it, the survivors of the Confederate States of America went through the same mental gymnastics.
6. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:16 · Score: 0
  
  From indie music, yes, but then they're not involved in the Grammys. I don't understand what mindset you have to be in where you'll spend the time to watch the Grammys but not spend time discovering the truckloads of great music that the Grammy awards completely ignore (and thus show how stupid and useless the Grammys are).
7. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:16 · Score: 1
  
  But Saint Jobs invented the concept of music. Don't you remember the teachings of the Good iBook? He also invented The One Way to listen to music over an iComputer, as well as The One Way to make music. Do you need to go back to The Happy iRoom for re-education, Wolfing1?
8. Re:Sigh by UnknowingFool · 2012-02-15 05:16 · Score: 2
  
  Not only that but you can buy the song you want instead of the whole album in most cases. Twenty years ago you had to buy the whole album if a single was not released. Of course there are some songs that are restricted to the album but the vast majority can be purchased as singles. Also independent artists have a global distribution channel that they didn't have before.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
9. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:17 · Score: 0
  
  That was actually an anti-trust lawsuit over price fixing that lowered your whole-album prices. iTunes is responsible for your ability to buy single songs of your choice.
10. Re:Sigh by ackthpt · 2012-02-15 05:19 · Score: 2
  
  What a crock. Did we expect any better from the music industry?
  WTF are you talking about?!?!
  They did give a Heavy Metal Grammy to my favorite metal act: Jethro Tull.
  Yeah, nothing the Music Industry does through the Grammys surprises me. I gave up on those awards years ago because the awards are more about directing public attention in the direction the industry wants people to look, rather than giving awards based upon actual merit. At least the Oscars still is democratic enough to give awards to people who really do deserve them .. at least, more often than the Grammys do.
  That said... who knows, maybe the Oscars will disappoint and hand Steve Jobs a special posthumous Oscar for giving the Computer Generated Animation segment of Cinema a higher watermark, though his support of Pixar.
  
  --
  
  A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
11. Re:Sigh by Karellen · 2012-02-15 05:23 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The award is not for "contributions to the recording industry", it's for "significant contributions, other than performance, to the field of recording."
  Steve Jobs' contributions to the "recording industry" may well have been negative or damaging, but they have nothing to do with the field of recording. They were entirely to do with content distribution, which is totally different.
  (IANA sound engineer, but I know a few...)
  
  --
  Why doesn't the gene pool have a life guard?
12. Re:Sigh by gstoddart · 2012-02-15 05:23 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  What a crock. Did we expect any better from the music industry?
  Like Steve Jobs and Apple or not ... but if you can't see that iTunes totally changed how a huge number of people get and access their music, it's probably because you refuse to.
  iTunes was the first widespread way that people could legally buy (or rip) digital music, and quickly managed to sell billions of songs. And the iPod radically changed how people accessed their music -- yes, there had been MP3 players, but in terms of making it widely usable by non-tech people. nothing else made quite the same impact. And, the iTunes software itself gives a nice, consistent way of dealing with this stuff. And, it also lets yo handle other media types through the exact same interface, and doesn't even require you to know what an MP3 is to use it.
  Other than Napster (which got shut down because it was largely being used to pirate songs), name me one way you can get digital music that has had anywhere near the impact of iTunes?
  And, yes, I will admit I've had iPods and iTunes since about 2001. But my mother-in-law is making noises about getting an iPod -- because even she understands what it is and what it's for. Do you think she'd know WTF a Zune is? I highly doubt it. And, at the time I chose to go the iPod/iTunes route, Windows Media Player was absolute crap -- I haven't touched it since, so I have no idea what it's like now.
  Sure, there are players out there which have some features that a few hard-core geeks want ... but quite honestly, I have only ever known one person who needed Ogg Vorbis support and I can't think of any other features that might be missing from the iPod. (Well, I hear people whine you can't easily copy songs off the iPod, but that's because Apple didn't want to get sued by the music industry, and because iTunes keeps extra information about songs in its database)
  I can see exactly why they gave him this award. I mean, if Paris Hilton could use an iPod, how hard could it be? Geeks don't like easy to use devices, but the rest of the consumer world does.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
13. Re:Sigh by ackthpt · 2012-02-15 05:23 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Today: "Yeah, Steve screwed us, but at least he didn't post the video on YouTube."
  2050: "The MPAA and RIAA led the fight to make media cheaper and more accessible worldwide."
  Come to think of it, the survivors of the Confederate States of America went through the same mental gymnastics.
  iTunes really was a saviour for the music industry, stupidly they clung to the belief their old business model was the only way. Now that they're all rolling in bigger piles of money than before, they want to hold the Kill Switch on our internet because every single one of is is either a Pirate or Pirate in Potentia.
  
  --
  
  A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
14. Re:Sigh by jeffmeden · 2012-02-15 05:28 · Score: 2
  
  Its really amazing that they actually gave it to him. The RIAA sort of hates him for making their product more reasonably priced. I pay less now for an album ( on amazon, but itunes if you like) than I did 20 years ago, not accounting for inflation.
  The Planet Money radio show (also a podcast) has had a lot of content lately about where money comes/goes in the music industry. Did you know, for example, that in 2011 Katy Perry's content (her "Teenage Dream" cd and associated singles) netted the recording studio that holds the contract about $8 million (out of about $45 million in sales) and sales via iTunes netted Apple, Inc about $8 million (from about $25M in sales)... So yes, they love him and they hate him, he won just as much profit from the work, by having a glorified web site to sell it on, as the recording studio did that put the whole thing together. The bottom line is though, that without iTunes in place those downloads could have very well not profited the recording industry *at all*...
15. Re:Sigh by msheekhah · 2012-02-15 05:31 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  They cut out massive costs for manufacturing and wound up making more on iTunes than they margin they made on CD's. Of course they'd love him.
  
  --
  Mark Anthony Collins
16. Re:Sigh by squidflakes · 2012-02-15 05:35 · Score: 1
  
  Come on, have you ever heard Tull in concert? When they do Beltaine it rocks. So, maybe it isn't exactly Master of Puppets but who can understand those Metallica boys anyway. No sir, real metal has lyrics you can understand and relate to, not the barking of dogs followed by shrill high pitched warbling about driving silver stakes through tongues to keep them from blaspheme.
17. Re:Sigh by jeffmeden · 2012-02-15 05:40 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Today: "Yeah, Steve screwed us, but at least he didn't post the video on YouTube."
  2050: "The MPAA and RIAA led the fight to make media cheaper and more accessible worldwide."
  Come to think of it, the survivors of the Confederate States of America went through the same mental gymnastics.
  This is OT but one hilarious example is the town of Enterprise, AL which lauded the efforts of the Boll Weevil for providing the shift away from cotton (a troublesome and often low-value crop) toward more diverse crops including peanuts. Mind you, George Washington Carver is generally credited with the popularization of peanut farming across the south in the early 20th century. Oh, he's black? Nope, he had nothing to do with it, it was the pest that destroyed several years of cotton harvests that did it... Better thank that little bug!
18. Re:Sigh by AngryDeuce · 2012-02-15 05:41 · Score: 2
  
  I know, right?
  Netflix ought to send some representatives down to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to make sure they get their honorary Oscar next year.
19. Re:Sigh by ackthpt · 2012-02-15 05:50 · Score: 2
  
  They cut out massive costs for manufacturing and wound up making more on iTunes than they margin they made on CD's. Of course they'd love him.
  Manufacturing, distributions, logistics, returns, etc. A lot of cost removed, but the time to market is also greatly reduced. Cut an album, master it and publish it online.
  
  --
  
  A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
20. Re:Sigh by GaratNW · 2012-02-15 05:50 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  This.
  
  I am not particularly fond of Apple as a company. Their strong arm tactics drive me crazy, and the slavish fan base constantly going on about the innovation they supposedly do (with their devices). But...
  
  The true innovation that Apple has done though had nothing to do with their devices, but the platforms they created when they figured out how to handle the iTunes store, the App store, and those annoying walled gardens we all love to love and love to hate. For all the bad, it really has changed how people think about software and media distribution, and opened up opportunities to a lot of people, when the old distribution channels were only open to the chosen few.
  
  Their devices are not innovative, they are just the most polished and accessible devices pretty much available. No wonder they are so love/hate on Slashdot, but the rest of the world loves em. Combined with one of the most effective distribution channels ever made, it's a pretty remarkable combo for consumers.
21. Re:Sigh by ackthpt · 2012-02-15 05:54 · Score: 2
  
  Its really amazing that they actually gave it to him. The RIAA sort of hates him for making their product more reasonably priced. I pay less now for an album ( on amazon, but itunes if you like) than I did 20 years ago, not accounting for inflation.
  The Planet Money radio show (also a podcast) has had a lot of content lately about where money comes/goes in the music industry. Did you know, for example, that in 2011 Katy Perry's content (her "Teenage Dream" cd and associated singles) netted the recording studio that holds the contract about $8 million (out of about $45 million in sales) and sales via iTunes netted Apple, Inc about $8 million (from about $25M in sales)... So yes, they love him and they hate him, he won just as much profit from the work, by having a glorified web site to sell it on, as the recording studio did that put the whole thing together. The bottom line is though, that without iTunes in place those downloads could have very well not profited the recording industry *at all*...
  Someone is overlooking something, somewhere. The sale of physical recordings passes through distributors, transportation & logisitics and then to the retailer. All of them got a cut, so iTunes simply removed the physical and time to market aspects. One copy becomes n copies when downloaded .. no need to forcast and take a risk on how many pressings are needed, etc.
  
  --
  
  A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
22. Re:Sigh by ackthpt · 2012-02-15 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  Come on, have you ever heard Tull in concert? When they do Beltaine it rocks. So, maybe it isn't exactly Master of Puppets but who can understand those Metallica boys anyway. No sir, real metal has lyrics you can understand and relate to, not the barking of dogs followed by shrill high pitched warbling about driving silver stakes through tongues to keep them from blaspheme.
  And here I was thinking Ian Anderson had a solid gold flute, which was considerably more heavy than standar flutes....
  
  --
  
  A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
23. Re:Sigh by ackthpt · 2012-02-15 05:58 · Score: 2
  
  From indie music, yes, but then they're not involved in the Grammys. I don't understand what mindset you have to be in where you'll spend the time to watch the Grammys but not spend time discovering the truckloads of great music that the Grammy awards completely ignore (and thus show how stupid and useless the Grammys are).
  Agree. The Grammys are a complete sham. It's about promoting the industry and trying to convice the kiddies the music they listen to is award winning stuff.
  I'm finding World Music is very rich and there's no end to it. Thanks to the interwebs we now can find recordings of it, where once you had to be there.
  
  --
  
  A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
24. Re:Sigh by paimin · 2012-02-15 06:01 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Well, I AM a sound engineer, and not only are the "field of recording" and the "recording industry" completely interconnected, but particularly in the context of the Grammys the distinction you are making does not exist. To the Grammys, the "field of recording" IS the "recording industry". Perhaps that fact is objectionable, but that has nothing to do with anyone's feelings about Steve Jobs in particular. He fits the award just fine.
  
  --
  Facebook is the new AOL
25. Re:Sigh by 19thNervousBreakdown · 2012-02-15 06:02 · Score: 2
  
  It takes 2 hours to watch the Grammys. How much time do you think it takes to wade into an entire new super-genre of music?
  
  --
  <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
26. Re:Sigh by Stewie241 · 2012-02-15 06:03 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe it was Garage Band which apparently is half decent? I dunno.
27. Re:Sigh by sqldr · 2012-02-15 06:10 · Score: 1
  
  What a crock. Did we expect any better from the music industry?
  I think the key word there is "industry". That said, the music industry's contribution to music has only ever been negative.
  
  --
  I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
28. Re:Sigh by sqldr · 2012-02-15 06:11 · Score: 1
  
  Like Steve Jobs and Apple or not ... but if you can't see that iTunes totally changed how a huge number of people get and access their music, it's probably because you refuse to.
  Changing the way a car showroom looks doesn't involve contributing to cars.
  
  --
  I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
29. Re:Sigh by joh · 2012-02-15 06:14 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Their devices are not innovative, they are just the most polished and accessible devices pretty much available. No wonder they are so love/hate on Slashdot, but the rest of the world loves em. Combined with one of the most effective distribution channels ever made, it's a pretty remarkable combo for consumers.
  I think that many people just confuse "invention" and "innovation":
  Wikipedia: "Innovation is the creation of better or more effective products, processes, services, technologies, or ideas that are accepted by markets, governments, and society. Innovation differs from invention in that innovation refers to the use of a new idea or method, whereas invention refers more directly to the creation of the idea or method itself."
  Apple might not have invented very much, but Apple surely has innovated a lot, also with devices.
30. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 06:17 · Score: 0
  
  Well, actually there was mp3.com before that wasn't there? But the RIAA didn't like indies getting any exposure so they shut it down hard.
31. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 06:20 · Score: 0
  
  Their "visionary" founder/CEO would have to kick the bucket, first. When that happens, you can be sure that the movie hacks will get to the same kind of knob-polishing the recording hacks did for Steve Jobs.
32. Re:Sigh by lexman098 · 2012-02-15 06:24 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, there are players out there which have some features that a few hard-core geeks want ... but quite honestly, I have only ever known one person who needed Ogg Vorbis support and I can't think of any other features that might be missing from the iPod. (Well, I hear people whine you can't easily copy songs off the iPod, but that's because Apple didn't want to get sued by the music industry, and because iTunes keeps extra information about songs in its database)
  Ugh. I hardly know what Ogg is, but I can immediately think of a couple features the iPod didn't have when I was looking for an mp3 player. The first is a custom equalizer (ipod only has presets), and the second is a selection of 3rd party music library managers. I've never actually owned an ipod so correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard from many people that you basically have to use itunes with it (WMP not required for most others).
  Also, it doesn't/didn't play divx or xvid (not exactly obscure formats and very useful on airplanes), and it was more expensive. And yes, I've never heard of any other mp3 player (of which there are many) not letting you copy mp3s from it.
  If you're curious, I bought a Creative Zen that I had for many years before my smartphone took over.
33. Re:Sigh by hitmark · 2012-02-15 06:25 · Score: 1
  
  This most likely because unlike other devices that basically relied on appearing as a USB storage device, the iPod needed to go via iTunes for just about everything. Seems this and the AAC wrapper was enough to get RIAA to play ball. I guess they thought it would make the task of transferring those files elsewhere difficult.
  
  --
  comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
34. Re:Sigh by Phat_Tony · 2012-02-15 06:28 · Score: 2
  
  Boll Weevil Monument
  
  --
  Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
35. Re:Sigh by future+assassin · 2012-02-15 06:28 · Score: 1
  
  >but if you can't see that iTunes totally changed how a huge number of people get and access their music, it's probably because you refuse to.
  Not sure where you grew up but even in my semi secluded city there was a lot of music discovery and trading though cassette tapes. Usually with in days everyone in my school had a tape copy of any new album that was released. The only thing that iTunes changes was you could spend your money from a chair in front of your computer. but long before that there was tons of trading by even non "geeks" through Napster and ftp. Ah yah good times with WarFTP http://www.warftp.org/ and shares.
  
  --
  by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
36. Re:Sigh by gstoddart · 2012-02-15 06:29 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Changing the way a car showroom looks doesn't involve contributing to cars.
  Being the first to come up with a wide spread model for having a car showroom, and having any commercial success with it, however, does. I don't believe there were any "car showrooms" before that.
  I honestly can't name a single digital music store which existed before iTunes. And I doubt that anything which predated iTunes still exists. Apple also managed to get the big labels to sign up when everyone was trying to figure out how to shut down Napster et al.
  As I said, before the iPod there were MP3 players ... but the overall impact of iPods and iTunes vastly outstrips any of those. Most of them aren't even in business any more.
  I'll be the first to admit that Apple doesn't invent technology out of the blue that nobody has ever seen ... but what they do is to provide a much better integrated platform that non-technical people can use without fear. It just works, and doesn't do any of that weird technology stuff that people don't want to get involved with.
  Name me a single player/software combination that has had nearly as much impact on the market. Because I can't think of any ... the Zune was, comparatively, a joke.
  Other than the idiot who got the Zune logo tattooed on his arm and later regretted it, I honestly don't know a single person who has owned one of them. Creative products disappeared a long time ago as far as I know. My wife's old Sony player which used proprietary formats and software wasn't wide-spread. Sure, you can buy cheap ass USB players that you can drag files onto and play, but you're stuck with Media Player or whatever. It certainly doesn't offer you a store or a nice interface.
  Apple has sold something like 300 million iPods to date ... who is in second place? The answer, nobody cares enough to find out.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
37. Re:Sigh by quacking+duck · 2012-02-15 06:40 · Score: 1
  
  Innovation: "the creation of better or more effective products, processes, services, technologies, or ideas that are accepted by markets, governments, and society"
  The original iPod was most definitely innovative. Marketing aside, three technical reasons why it succeeded:
  - Firewire, so transferring 5GB of data would take minutes, not hours. AFAIK no other player was using even USB2 yet.
  - smallest (physical) HDD available at the time.
  - uncomplicated user interface driven by scroll wheel with minimal buttons
  Everything is built or inspired from what came before, so while these technologies may have existed independently in other devices or for other purposes, integrating them into a single device for portable music easily fits the definition of innovation.
38. Re:Sigh by GaratNW · 2012-02-15 06:43 · Score: 1
  
  Wish I could mod up in the same thread, that language clarification is very helpful. I will remember it in the future, as I think it's an important distinction to make.
39. Re:Sigh by sunderland56 · 2012-02-15 06:52 · Score: 2
  
  The award is not for "contributions to the recording industry", it's for "significant contributions, other than performance, to the field of recording."
  Steve Jobs and Apple were not in the field of recording, they were/are in the field of sales and marketing.
  
  Did they give a grammy to the founder of Tower Records?
40. Re:Sigh by gstoddart · 2012-02-15 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  Ugh. I hardly know what Ogg is, but I can immediately think of a couple features the iPod didn't have when I was looking for an mp3 player. The first is a custom equalizer (ipod only has presets), and the second is a selection of 3rd party music library managers. I've never actually owned an ipod so correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard from many people that you basically have to use itunes with it (WMP not required for most others).
  I just checked my iPod, and it has presets in the EQ, but not custom settings. But, in 10 years I've never gone looking for that. So to me it's not a feature I need. I suspect most of the rest of the consumers don't care either, which is why they don't have it. They basically took features most people will never use and got rid of them.
  As far as I know, you're correct ... iPods are intended to use used with iTunes. If you want a 3rd party music manager, get something else. But, the iTunes software (for me) provides some features I find indispensable ... things like being able to create a playlist of "music not played in the last 6 months or played less than 5 times" is something iTunes can do for me, and the players keep track of play counts and the like. It keeps track across all of my devices, and when I sync with iTunes it updates it. It's a much more integrated platform, which for people who don't want to fiddle with the technology is a good thing. (Other players/music managers might keep this extra information, I honestly don't know.) Again, it's about what you want out of the device.
  
  Also, it doesn't/didn't play divx or xvid (not exactly obscure formats and very useful on airplanes), and it was more expensive. And yes, I've never heard of any other mp3 player (of which there are many) not letting you copy mp3s from it.
  Honestly, I've never had any files in divx or xvid ... when I rip my older DVDs I put them into M4V format and import them into iTunes. So, for me they're file formats that never come up against. I also have the added benefit that when I buy a new DVD with the digital copy, I can have access to the files on my iPod or iPad (I have a cable that lets me play movies through a TV with RCA inputs). For all I know, iTunes will play those files, but I honestly don't know.
  Apple stores the files on iPods with the filenames changed to support their own database ... you technically can pull the files off if you've enabled disk usage, but they end up with cryptic filenames like MP123XYZ.MP3 -- it doesn't store it in a filesystem with the names exposed. Again, this is to support their own database, and likely to keep them from getting sued for making something that made copying some else's music easy. But, the database also stored a bunch of extra data about songs, all of which I can use to create playlists with.
  For me, I actually like the integration between the iPod and iTunes, and I've been using it so long I guess I've drunk the Kool Aid. And, for some people with very specific needs, it may well not do that ... but for most of the things most people will want to do, it does it just fine. Better than fine I'd say.
  The good thing about choice, is you're free to make your own based on whatever criteria you select ... but there's simply some features most people will never need or know what they're for. Apple fills that niche by just making it easy to use.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
41. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 07:12 · Score: 0
  
  Take your straw man and shove it up your ass.
42. Re:Sigh by lexman098 · 2012-02-15 07:24 · Score: 1
  
  things like being able to create a playlist of "music not played in the last 6 months or played less than 5 times" is something iTunes can do for me, and the players keep track of play counts and the like.
  That's another feature I just remembered then which the ipod doesn't have. The player I got could easily pick a random album or give me the top 20 least played, most played, highest rated, never rated etc.. in a playlist on the spot (no computer sync required). I also remember being able to pull those ratings and play counts to be synced with last.fm or something (which I wasn't really interested in).
  But you're a mac guy. That's fine.
43. Re:Sigh by jeffmeden · 2012-02-15 07:25 · Score: 1
  
  The point was that it must severely chap the ass of the record executives who have to sit there and think "We could be sitting on twice as much profit right now if we only had the foresight to be the ones with a web site to sell music downloads on"... Of course, iTunes distribution is only a part of the iThing ecosystem (which is a big part of what drives sales) so it's not entirely a 1:1 comparison, but it does point out how little the recording industry really has control over any more (and they are very unhappy about that.)
44. Re:Sigh by gstoddart · 2012-02-15 07:33 · Score: 1
  
  But you're a mac guy. That's fine.
  Actually, I don't own a Mac, and never have.
  I started running itunes in XP back in about 2000/2001, and I run it in Vista now -- initially it was because I thought WMP was crap, and I had been through several really annoying MP3 players that just didn't work the way I wanted. Initially, I ripped my MP3s from my FreeBSD box and mounted them from a shared drive onto my Windows machine with Samba. (And, at the time, I only grudgingly owned a Windows machine having been a UNIX geek for a decade before that)
  I've just never had any reason to look any any other music player besides iPods, because I've been happy with them. I think I'm on my 5th, 3 of which are still in the house and in use.
  You may find it hard to believe, but having and using iPods/iTunes doesn't make one a Mac guy. In fact, I've not laid hands on an actual Mac in a very long time.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
45. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 07:36 · Score: 0
  
  So is your mom. I saw her performing sales and marketing of herself on a street corner last night.
46. Re:Sigh by Algae_94 · 2012-02-15 07:40 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but the quoted figure for the the labels is $8 million out of $45 million. That's $37 million that went to "Other than labels" A lot more than the $8 million iTunes takes is left out of their pockets. They don't even take a majority of the money.
47. Re:Sigh by Algae_94 · 2012-02-15 07:43 · Score: 1
  
  That would be a terrible choice then. I don't recall any Grammys going out to other people that created music authoring programs. That includes the programs that professionals use to author their recordings.
48. Re:Sigh by Stormwatch · 2012-02-15 07:49 · Score: 1
  
  The flute is a heavy, metal instrument.
  
  --
  Circumcision is child abuse.
49. Re:Sigh by squidflakes · 2012-02-15 07:49 · Score: 1
  
  I think most bands are too concerned with their image to have a musician who can be referred to as a "Heavy Metal Flautist." The only thing worse is having a tromboner.
50. Re:Sigh by Stewie241 · 2012-02-15 07:52 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know that I disagree. I was grasping at straws, really.
51. Re:Sigh by Stormwatch · 2012-02-15 08:04 · Score: 1
  
  name me one way you can get digital music that has had anywhere near the impact of iTunes
  BitTorrent.
  
  --
  Circumcision is child abuse.
52. Re:Sigh by lexman098 · 2012-02-15 08:06 · Score: 1
  
  You said:
  
  It keeps track across all of my devices, and when I sync with iTunes it updates it. It's a much more integrated platform, which for people who don't want to fiddle with the technology is a good thing.
  
  I can have access to the files on my iPod or iPad
  
  iPods ... I think I'm on my 5th
  
  I've just never had any reason to look any any other music player
  
  I've drunk the Kool Aid
  You're definitely some kind of "Apple guy". Maybe I shouldn't have said mac.
53. Re:Sigh by sqldr · 2012-02-15 08:06 · Score: 2
  
  I honestly can't name a single digital music store which existed before iTunes
  I cannot name a single good song which got written because of itunes.
  
  --
  I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
54. Re:Sigh by gstoddart · 2012-02-15 08:17 · Score: 1
  
  You're definitely some kind of "Apple guy". Maybe I shouldn't have said mac.
  Sure, because I've been using iPods for so long I've been through several. I continue to use them because they work for what I want them to do.
  When the iPad came out, I bought one because (contrary to what some people claim), it was the first consumer tablet that was widely available in my lifetime. It also had the added benefit that I could plug it into my iTunes and load stuff onto it within minutes of opening the box. So everything I already had just worked with it. Some nice tablets have come out since then, but I simply have no incentive to ditch my iPad.
  But, really, who cares? I've got Windows machines, FreeBSD boxes, Linux machines ... it's just technology. In the grand scheme of things, they're tools.
  It just so happens that my media devices have been made by Apple for the last decade or so, and I'm happy with them and continue to use them.
  I'm also a user of vi and a UNIX geek.
  You might be a rabid Windows fanboi, or a dedicated Linux geek, or still clinging to BeOS ... pick whatever device floats your boat. It's the seething irrational hate for Apple here on Slashdot that makes no sense -- people who have never even used it are convinced they're evil and produce shitty products. At that point, it's mostly religion and not about anything rational.
  But, if you're going to dismiss what I'm saying on the basis that "I'm an Apple guy", well, then to you I say ... neener neener neener, you're a doodie head -- because it's about as meaningful.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
55. Re:Sigh by lexman098 · 2012-02-15 08:55 · Score: 1
  
  But, really, who cares?
  Apparently you with your long winded replies which try to convince me that you're not the Apple guy you make yourself out to be; even though you claim that there wouldn't be anything wrong with that if you were.
  My initial point was just that you've already been engulfed in their ecosystem (obviously). Seeing an "irrational hate for Apple" is all in your head.
56. Re:Sigh by gstoddart · 2012-02-15 08:59 · Score: 1
  
  Apparently you with your long winded replies which try to convince me that you're not the Apple guy you make yourself out to be; even though you claim that there wouldn't be anything wrong with that if you were.
  LOL, truth be told, I'm long winded in general. :-P
  You asked a couple of questions about their products, I answered them.
  
  Seeing an "irrational hate for Apple" is all in your head.
  Read the rest of this thread, or any article about Apple ... it's far from in my head. (And I'm not accusing you of irrational Apple hate, merely pointing out that on Slashdot it's a widespread and prevalent sentiment.)
  Cheers.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
57. Re:Sigh by sessamoid · 2012-02-15 09:22 · Score: 1
  
  Not even close.
  
  --
  "No, no, no. Don't tug on that. You never know what it might be attached to."
58. Re:Sigh by gstoddart · 2012-02-15 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  I cannot name a single good song which got written because of itunes.
  And, nobody is saying that iTunes caused good music to come into existence. The award is for the impact iTunes had on the music industry -- the iTunes store has sold 10 billion songs and, for many people, is likely the only digital music store they've ever used or heard of. Old people who barely use computers know what an iPod is and what iTunes is. My 65+ year old mother in law knows what it is and is pondering an iPod. If you can get the baby boomers aware of your product, that's pretty transformative -- 15 years ago I had a hard time explaining what the internet was.
  I cannot identify a single earthquake caused by me farting either; fortunately, that's not what we're discussing. Though, I'm sure that would be worthy of at least a footnote somewhere, if not an award. ;-)
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
59. Re:Sigh by Darinbob · 2012-02-15 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  More CEO worship, as if the 60,000 Apple employees don't actually count since Steve did the actual work.
60. Re:Sigh by sqldr · 2012-02-15 10:39 · Score: 1
  
  The award is for the impact iTunes had on the music industry
  precisely. Not music then.
  
  --
  I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
61. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 11:12 · Score: 0
  
  And some people confuse "innovation" with "marketing"..
62. Re:Sigh by gstoddart · 2012-02-15 12:08 · Score: 1
  
  precisely. Not music then.
  Why, yes ... it even says so right in TFS ...
  
  the award is handed out annually to 'individuals who, during their careers in music, have made significant contributions, other than performance, to the field of recording.'
  Did you have a point you'd care to elaborate on? Or are you just here to snark?
  The Grammy Trustees can give out any damned award they see fit on whatever random criteria they choose. I'd suggest getting over it.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
63. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 14:23 · Score: 0
  
  MP3.com, Audiogalaxy (lawsuited to hell and back because they wanted to replace the publisher altogether). Oh and Napster.
64. Re:Sigh by mattack2 · 2012-02-15 14:56 · Score: 2
  
  I pay less now for an album ( on amazon, but itunes if you like) than I did 20 years ago
  Then you were paying too much for your albums. While I couldn't get *EVERY* CD there, I got the vast vast majority of my music collection from BMG, averaging between $5-6 per CD, even including their ridiculous "shipping" charges. I just waited for the regularly occurring "sales", and bought CDs only then. (I got a much smaller proportion from Columbia House, but even they were cheaper than buying every CD at $18.99 or whatever... I only got the ones from them that I couldn't get through BMG.)
65. Re:Sigh by jeffmeden · 2012-02-16 02:27 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but the quoted figure for the the labels is $8 million out of $45 million. That's $37 million that went to "Other than labels" A lot more than the $8 million iTunes takes is left out of their pockets. They don't even take a majority of the money.
  You're right, I can't believe they bothered paying the artist (for performing/writing) or the other songwriters, musicians, or anyone else involved with the work and creativity of making an album, publicizing it, and getting it into the hands of consumers...
66. Re:Sigh by Stormwatch · 2012-02-16 16:17 · Score: 1
  
  Are you kidding me, or just out of touch with reality?
  http://www.prguitarman.com/photos/lol_comics/208reject1.gif
  
  --
  Circumcision is child abuse.
Oh goodie. by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2012-02-15 05:10 · Score: 1, Flamebait

Another thread where we can bitch about how Steve Jobs really didn't do anything significant even though iTunes is a household name.

--

"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
1. Re:Oh goodie. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:15 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  iTunes may be a household name, but the award states "career in music" and "significant contributions, other than performance, to the field of recording." Steve Jobs fails on both of those requirements. He may deserve an award of some technical nature for the field of access to purchase music, but iTunes does not merit a Grammy for Steve.
2. Re:Oh goodie. by x1r8a3k · 2012-02-15 05:31 · Score: 1
  
  Personally, my issue with this is that Jobs didn't really do anything but fund it.
  
  If you must, find the team of engineers that got the store working, and give them some credit.
3. Re:Oh goodie. by Espectr0 · 2012-02-15 05:32 · Score: 1
  
  Convincing the studios to remove DRM , while not exactly a "field in recording" issue, may be enough to qualify.
  Also, Apple popularized the AAC format, which improved audio quality beyond MP3. Perhaps this was enough.
  
  --
  Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
4. Re:Oh goodie. by ciderbrew · 2012-02-15 05:35 · Score: 1
  
  Amazon will get a book award next week. Man opens a record shop, wins Grammy doesn't see right.
5. Re:Oh goodie. by Reverberant · 2012-02-15 05:36 · Score: 2
  
  iTunes may be a household name, but the award states "career in music" and "significant contributions, other than performance, to the field of recording." Steve Jobs fails on both of those requirements. He may deserve an award of some technical nature for the field of access to purchase music, but iTunes does not merit a Grammy for Steve.
  It's not "career in music," it's "during their careers in music" which changes the context some. In any event, looking at the effect Jobs had on the music industry, I'd say he was at least as deserving of the award as Dick Clark, Don Cornelius, and Walt Disney (previous recipients).
6. Re:Oh goodie. by Ameryll · 2012-02-15 05:37 · Score: 1
  
  Or for his contributions to Pixar.
7. Re:Oh goodie. by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2012-02-15 06:31 · Score: 1
  
  iTunes may be a household name, but the award states "career in music" and "significant contributions, other than performance, to the field of recording."
  iTunes isn't a significant contribution to music? Do you understand what it takes to actually become a household name?
  So is this just plain 'ol Steve hate or has iTunes been around for so long that 5 people with mod points are now taking it for granted?
  
  --
  
  "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
8. Re:Oh goodie. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 06:45 · Score: 0
  
  You really can't tell the difference between a record shop and iTunes?
9. Re:Oh goodie. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 07:22 · Score: 0
  
  meriting a Grammy
10. Re:Oh goodie. by Jonner · 2012-02-15 07:52 · Score: 1
  
  Who would seriously dispute Jobs did things of great significance? The interesting question is whether the significant things he did were more positive or negative. I'm conflicted about the impact of iTunes and iTMS. They have challenged the powers that be in the recording industry and given customers more affordable access to DRM-free music, which is great. However, while challenging RIAA members' stranglehold on music distribution, Apple has become a powerful force in that space and succeeds in controlling how customers use the devices that play the music to an even greater extent than the RIAA has been able to.
  While I will not spend any money on Apple devices or music, I do acknowledge that without Jobs' effort to sell music without DRM on iTMS, I may not have as easy access to DRM-free music via services like Amazon. Similar to the banning of the Flash plugin on iOS devices, pressure from Apple has sometimes improved the situation for everyone even if it was done for the wrong reasons.
11. Re:Oh goodie. by Algae_94 · 2012-02-15 07:54 · Score: 1
  
  This was the Grammys. They don't give out awards for technical merit. They give them out to stroke egos in the recording industry and to try and influence the direction the industry moves in.
12. Re:Oh goodie. by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2012-02-15 07:59 · Score: 1
  
  Who would seriously dispute Jobs did things of great significance?
  
  On several occasions in this article people have likened iTunes to a record store, followed by making a fart noise.
  I don't understand it, either. Back in my day, before iTunes, if I heard a song on the radio I liked, I had to buy a delicate $20 compact disc with 10 other songs I didn't want so I could listen to it skip in the car. Apparently making it fun to enjoy music again and selling ten billion songs in the process isn't quite Grammy worthy.
  
  --
  
  "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
13. Re:Oh goodie. by Anarchduke · 2012-02-16 02:31 · Score: 1
  
  Tila Tequila, Kim Kardashian, Snooki
  
  No. I can honestly say I have no idea how some people become household names.
  
  --
  who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
Uh, what? by AngryDeuce · 2012-02-15 05:11 · Score: 3, Insightful

Steve Jobs contribution to music? What the hell has he done that's relevant to the Grammy's at all?
When's the Vatican going to beatify him? Saint Steve, bringer of attractive electronic devices...it's a miracle!!!!! Quick, start busing cripples to Cupertino! Behold the power of STEVE!!!!
1. Re:Uh, what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:14 · Score: 0, Funny
  
  iTunes, dumbshit.
2. Re:Uh, what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:15 · Score: 0
  
  I wish I had a username so I could mod you up...hilarious
3. Re:Uh, what? by AngryDeuce · 2012-02-15 05:21 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Oh, so his Grammy-worthy contribution to music was creating a fucking store? Wow...
  Where's Shawn Fanning's Grammy? Or Sean Parker's? If it wasn't for Napster iTunes probably wouldn't even fucking exist.
4. Re:Uh, what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:29 · Score: 0
  
  It's along the vein of Obama winning a peace prize. The world is seriously fucked up.
5. Re:Uh, what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:37 · Score: 0
  
  I think you need to read up on your history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napster
  because Napster != theft. It was just that the music industry at that time was not yet realising the facts !
6. Re:Uh, what? by SecurityGuy · 2012-02-15 05:39 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  I rather suspect AngryDeuce got that this was about iTunes. I agree this is stupid. Jobs did fantastic things for *commerce* related to music. Nothing for music, really.
  I'd give one to the Guitar Hero people long before I'd give one to Jobs. They got millions of non-musicians playing fake instruments. Some of those, like me, were inspired to go try and buy the real thing. Some of those actually became good. I'm not one of them, but I know a couple.
7. Re:Uh, what? by Pharmboy · 2012-02-15 05:43 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  You say: "Oh, so his Grammy-worthy contribution to music was creating a fucking store? Wow..."
  
  Everyone knows that if Steve Jobs had not invented the digital music store, then everyone would have quit listening to music, and we would all be listen to talk radio by now, and the poor musicians would have to eek out a living by only getting paid for live performances. Never in the history of music have musicians been forced to do that.
  
  </sarcasm>
  
  --
  Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
8. Re:Uh, what? by Sloppy · 2012-02-15 05:45 · Score: 1
  
  I would have thought it's obvious: No Apple Music, no Beatles. No Beatles, no Sgt Pepper, diminished role for Abbey Road Studios, it kinda snowballs from there.
  You could say they're recognizing the wrong guy, and that they should have instead recognized Wozniak. But after his murder by John Hinckley, any such recognition would be posthum-- hey waitaminute, you're right!! WTF?!
  
  --
  As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
9. Re:Uh, what? by AngryDeuce · 2012-02-15 05:59 · Score: 1
  
  Did you learn that at the Time Masheen?!?!!?
10. Re:Uh, what? by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2012-02-15 06:21 · Score: 0
  
  Oh, so his Grammy-worthy contribution to music was creating a fucking store?
  Yes, dumbshit.
  
  --
  
  "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
11. Re:Uh, what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 06:24 · Score: 0
  
  When's the Vatican going to beatify him?
  I see what you did there.
12. Re:Uh, what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 07:02 · Score: 0
  
  Name a store that has sold ten billion songs.
13. Re:Uh, what? by oldmac31310 · 2012-02-15 07:30 · Score: 1
  
  Eek!
  
  --
  http://www.acetonestudio.com
14. Re:Uh, what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 08:03 · Score: 0
  
  walmart
15. Re:Uh, what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 12:22 · Score: 0
  
  Steve Jobs contribution to music? What the hell has he done that's relevant to the Grammy's at all?
  Taught them where the apostrophes go.
16. Re:Uh, what? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 12:46 · Score: 0
  
  Really? They award Grammys for that these days? CRAZY!
17. Re:Uh, what? by reub2000 · 2012-02-15 12:47 · Score: 1
  
  Because trading files on the internet is such an original idea. Nobody had been posting anything on the alt.* hierarchy except for trolling and spam!
18. Re:Uh, what? by AngryDeuce · 2012-02-15 14:02 · Score: 1
  
  Hey, I think it's ridiculous on both counts. My point was, if Steve Jobs deserves a Grammy for iTunes, than the fellows behind Napster deserve one, too. If it weren't for them, most of us would likely still be going to the record store buying CD's at $20 a piece to this day. I'm sure the RIAA cries bitter tears into their cocaine over that fact, but it doesn't make their impact in music today any less than Steve's. Arguably it's much larger...they brought the concept to the masses and let the genie out of the bottle in the first place.
  They're essentially giving him an award for doing what they refused to do themselves for years despite enormous demand from the public. It's not like getting music online was fucking groundbreaking, people had been doing that already for years when iTunes launched. So what was the Grammy-worthy contribution? Having enough capitol to force the labels to get behind him and eschew iTunes' competitors? Producing a piece of hardware that essentially forced people to use his music service, thus guaranteeing a customer right out of the box?
  This was just another Steve Jobs circle-jerk. I'm not trying to diminish the man's accomplishments, but giving him a Grammy was fucking retarded. Might as well give him an Oscar for his contribution to film because he fucking bought Pixar back in 1986.
Did Napster get one too? by VortexCortex · 2012-02-15 05:13 · Score: 5, Insightful

What about Bit-Torrent, Napster, Limewire, etc? I've got no doubt they've done more to spread the joy of music, especially those who couldn't afford it...
1. Re:Did Napster get one too? by bughunter · 2012-02-15 05:23 · Score: 1
  
  Filesharing sites didn't prove one could make money with digital distribution, so sadly, no.
  Whether the RIAA will eventually recognize that they proved that free distribution can increase paid distribution remains to be seen.
  
  --
  I can see the fnords!
2. Re:Did Napster get one too? by squidflakes · 2012-02-15 05:40 · Score: 2
  
  Hold on there Cowboy. The music industry just isn't interested in people who can't afford music. Sharing? That's communism. Setting up an online store where teenagers can run their parent's credit cards without any hassle? That friend, is capitalism, and that's what this award is celebrating.
3. Re:Did Napster get one too? by halcyon1234 · 2012-02-15 06:14 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  What about Bit-Torrent, Napster, Limewire, etc? I've got no doubt they've done more to spread the joy of music, especially those who couldn't afford it...
  
  They already had a copy of the award three days before the Grammys
  
  --
  UTF-8: There and Back Again
Did I miss it? by yourlord · 2012-02-15 05:14 · Score: 1, Insightful

Did I miss the Steve Jobs Christmas album or something?
He didn't have anything to do with making music. He helped create the first wildly successful internet based digital media sales/distribution system.. But replace the music files with porn movies and the premise is the same.. He was selling access to files in a repository.. It had nothing to do with making music.
This is just another group trying to rape his image for publicity.
1. Re:Did I miss it? by Sez+Zero · 2012-02-15 05:25 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Did I miss the Steve Jobs Christmas album or something?
  Yup, my favorite was Turtlenecks and Mistletoe but I really didn't care for Ye Old Yule Log of Personally-Identifiable Location.
  This was a Grammy Trustees Award, not a Grammy Award. The Trustees Award goes out to “individuals who, during their careers in music, have made significant contributions, other than performance, to the field of recording.”
2. Re:Did I miss it? by yourlord · 2012-02-15 05:53 · Score: 0
  
  This was a Grammy Trustees Award, not a Grammy Award. The Trustees Award goes out to individuals who, during their careers in music, have made significant contributions, other than performance, to the field of recording.
  What career in music?
  What contributions to the field of recording did he make?
  He made a huge contribution to commercial distribution of digital files.. That's it.. Not Grammy worthy.
3. Re:Did I miss it? by Sez+Zero · 2012-02-15 07:00 · Score: 1
  
  Last year Walter Miller won it and he's a TV producer. He produced TV award shows. Is that a career in music?
  I'd say that Steve Jobs made as much of a contribution to recorded music as did last year's winner.
4. Re:Did I miss it? by yourlord · 2012-02-15 07:16 · Score: 1
  
  Which further proves that the grammy awards are useless and meaningless.
  Of course, any awards group that would award "Best Hard Rock/Metal Performance" to the Foo Fighters over friggin Dream Theater is already a laughable joke..
5. Re:Did I miss it? by toriver · 2012-02-15 09:57 · Score: 1
  
  Meaningless to you, meaningful to those that award them.
  That you fail to see the significance of the iPod, iTunes and the iTunes Store to the music market just exposes your own ignorance.
6. Re:Did I miss it? by yourlord · 2012-02-15 10:41 · Score: 1
  
  I understand the significance to the digital media market. I do not see any significant contribution to the writing, performance, or recording of music.
RIAA loves Apple now by StripedCow · 2012-02-15 05:14 · Score: 1

And this makes me wonder what slashdotters are supposed to do now?
--
Apple: paywalling the internet

--
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
They should give it to the record execs... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:15 · Score: 0

They are advancing the cause of music too, right?
Wrong. by Picass0 · 2012-02-15 05:19 · Score: 3, Insightful

The istore may not have been the first digital music store but they have made the biggest impact in changing the business model. You can thank Apple for being able to buy the one decent song on a CD for an affordable price.
The iPod also has made it easier for people to have all of their favorites at their fingertips. Before that there were some crappy, poorly designed mp3 players by creative and that's about it. Your other option before ipod were walkman style cassette players.
It's easy to be cynical about the music business, but in this case recognition is deserved.
1. Re:Wrong. by ciderbrew · 2012-02-15 05:33 · Score: 2
  
  I wonder if they'll say TPB made the biggest impact in changing the business model? Back, so long ago when the ipod came out Archos were making much better spec units with ogg and other bits. But they just don't have the marketing or designer wank Apple can muster. I've just had a look at their website and apples stuff looks so much better. I'm sure Archos are all a bit better spec and cheaper - but who cares. Both still better than creative and that's about it.
2. Re:Wrong. by future+assassin · 2012-02-15 06:20 · Score: 1
  
  >The iPod also has made it easier for people to have all of their favorites at their fingertips. Before that there were some crappy, poorly designed mp3 players by creative and that's about it. Your other option before ipod were walkman style cassette players.
  Ummm you missed portable cd players which I've used since 1992. Tape players were already on way out but they chugged along the portable cd players untill cd burners were affordable.
  
  --
  by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
3. Re:Wrong. by hitmark · 2012-02-15 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_audio_player
  Seems there was quite the selection.
  
  --
  comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
4. Re:Wrong. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 06:37 · Score: 0
  
  The pre-iPod players had tiny calculator screens and crappy controls. Not the in the same league as even the 1st iPod.
5. Re:Wrong. by Picass0 · 2012-02-15 06:48 · Score: 1
  
  -- "Ummm you missed portable cd players which I've used since 1992."
  True. I'm officially an old person when I type walkman and reflexively follow it with "cassette player". I had intended to type CD player. But it was still a pain to lug all the CDs around. :)
  Also I remember owning lots of one-hit wonder CDs I regretted buying about five minutes after walking out of the music store.
6. Re:Wrong. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 06:48 · Score: 1
  
  The pre-iPod Empeg had an awesome large daylight-readable VFD screen and controls designed specifically for easy use in an automobile. The 1st iPod wasn't even in the same league. Heck, the current iPod still isn't.
  Oh, you wanted to limit the definition of mp3 players to that that allows only for your argument to win? Sorry, my bad.
7. Re:Wrong. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 06:49 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  You are dead wrong about the iPod and its predecessors. I despise the iPod and blame its popularity for the death of simple drag-and-drop, file/folder interfaces on mp3 players. Instead of just being able to scroll through my files like it's a hard disk, I have to contend with forced categories and mp3s getting lost because of mislabeling and on and on. Not all of us want to be treated like children by our music players.
8. Re:Wrong. by Darinbob · 2012-02-15 09:33 · Score: 1
  
  Then why give the award to the individual Steve Jobs instead of the actual Apple employees who thought up, designed, and created the store?
9. Re:Wrong. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 18:21 · Score: 0
  
  BS, there were CD burners and portable CD players, portable dat and minidisc years before the ipod october 2001. personally, I HATE the way the ipod has made artist / album style library interfaces the standard on portable media devices. I use rockbox on all of my mp3 players (non apple thank you) so I can use a traditional directory / file structure interface, and yes I loved the way my old 1st gen toshiba gigabeat MEG201 worked, years ago.
10. Re:Wrong. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-18 05:25 · Score: 0
  
  Because he was both famous and dead, two things the music industry just loves. I'm too lazy to post a link but see the recent $ony/Whitney Houston story.
Sosumi by bughunter · 2012-02-15 05:20 · Score: 2

And to think, Apple (under Jobs' first stint as CEO) taunted record companies with just one note.
And for people who just don't get it... Grammys are awarded for contributions to the business of music as well as the art. Love it or hate it, iTunes was instrumental (lol) in forcing the record companies to adopt the digital downloads business model.

--
I can see the fnords!
I wub the Grammys. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:22 · Score: 0

'cause Skrillex (of all people) won two of them, you see.
wub wub wub wub wub
1. Re:I wub the Grammys. by WilyCoder · 2012-02-15 06:16 · Score: 1
  
  Skrillex won a grammy?
  I don't want to live on this planet anymore...
2. Re:I wub the Grammys. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 07:43 · Score: 0
  
  Me neither.
  I may occasionally enjoy dubstep, but Skrillex sounds like Optimus Prime having a seizure. It's just...painful.
No one who has anything to do with itunes by slaker · 2012-02-15 05:24 · Score: 1

No one who has anything to do with itunes has any business accepting awards for anything.

--
-- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
1. Re:No one who has anything to do with itunes by gstoddart · 2012-02-15 05:34 · Score: 1
  
  No one who has anything to do with itunes has any business accepting awards for anything.
  Why, exactly? Or do you have nothing more to add than "because I said so"?
  Have you sold millions of audio devices? Billions of songs? Made a product that's a household name? Genuinely changed how people buy and play their music? Have you ever even used iTunes? Or is this just the standard Slashdot pissing and moaning?
  I bet you could walk into a retirement home, and ask for a show of hands who knows what an iPod is, and get a significant response. I'd almost be willing to bet that you might even get a non-zero response to who actually owns one ... I've actually seen grannies with iPods. If people in their 60's and 70's know what it is, and in some cases own then, that's a pretty significant impact.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Fanboy mods! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:29 · Score: 0, Insightful

iTunes, dumbshit.
"Dumbshit"?!?!?!
Well, well, well. The fanbois are still alive and well here on Slashdot - and they have mod ponts.
As another poster put it - St. Jobs created just an online store and used His power of the fanbois to bully the music industry into following His Way.
All hail Saint Jobs!
1. Re:Fanboy mods! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 12:06 · Score: 0
  
  I'd be willing to put money on the fact that the OP knew what the hell iTunes is. Everyone knows what iTunes is. I think the point was that iTunes is a shit reason for a fucking Grammy. No more valid than the guys who created Napster, for without them, we'd still be buying fucking CD's at $20 each...
2. Re:Fanboy mods! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 13:12 · Score: 0
  
  I'd be willing to put money on the fact that the OP knew what the hell iTunes is.
  You'd be wrong. If you or the other poster knew what you were talking about, you'd know why.
Apple Computers won the first technical Grammy too by readandburn · 2012-02-15 05:29 · Score: 5, Informative

In 2002: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2002/02/26Apple-Wins-2002-Technical-GRAMMY-Award.html
Meh. From an Apple fanboi. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2012-02-15 05:31 · Score: 1

This was also the same Grammys that just 3 years ago said they were the victim of Chris Brown beating the crap out of Rihanna.
Parse that sentence again.
Yeah, fuck the grammys.
Although it's not just iTunes. Garage Band, Logic Pro and OSX's stellar audio performance and FireWire support probably also helped immensely.

--
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
After the awards ceremony by Vinegar+Joe · 2012-02-15 05:34 · Score: 1

Steve was seen leaving with Whitney Houston.......

--
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
1. Re:After the awards ceremony by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:37 · Score: 0
  
  Too early, mate.. Just too early.
the real reason by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:35 · Score: 0

this is just to set a precedent/test the waters. now that he can be given an award outside his field, a nobel prize is no longer out of the question. there is one more hurdle, which is that a nobel prize cannot be given posthumously. As it's been considerably longer than three days, the committee will have to make an exception on this one.
head if itunes by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 05:44 · Score: 0

Why is the summary text telling "Eddy Cue" to perform command "head" for "if itunes"?

> head if itunes
head: cannot open `if' for reading: No such file or directory
head: cannot open `itunes' for reading: No such file or directory
not sure what to do next?
1. Re:head if itunes by Shoe+Puppet · 2012-02-15 08:56 · Score: 1
  
  if itunes; then
  head
  fi
  
  --
  (+1, Disagree)
He's dead, Jim by xx_chris · 2012-02-15 05:45 · Score: 1

This is not Slashdot level news.
This ranks up there with Obama's Nobel by Overzeetop · 2012-02-15 05:48 · Score: 1, Insightful

Quit giving shit to people who really don't deserve it.

--
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
1. Re:This ranks up there with Obama's Nobel by toriver · 2012-02-15 10:07 · Score: 0
  
  And how do you argue that the iPod and iTunes Store has not had a significant impact in the music industry?
  You know, arguing your point? A lost art, I know. Maybe I am asking too much of the Slashcrowd. Go back to your Linux toys.
2. Re:This ranks up there with Obama's Nobel by Overzeetop · 2012-02-18 04:58 · Score: 1
  
  FTFS "individuals who, during their careers in music, have made significant contributions, other than performance, to the field of recording."
  What part of recording (presumably production) did Mr. Jobs specifically pioneer? He was the CEO of a company who convinced the labels it was a good thing to sell songs a la carte over the internet, but that has nothing to do with the production of music - it's simply part of the retail chain. And, even then, is Jobs the right recipient? Should we give the grammy for an album to the CEO of the record label who signed the year's top artist? They were, after all, the guiding vision that found the talent and promoted it.
  
  --
  Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
And Obama got a Nobel Prize... by sdguero · 2012-02-15 05:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

These awards organizations are so politicized it no longer matters what their mission statements are. It's a popularity contest, namely in that they will give an award to whoever will make them the most popular, regardless of how much it tarnishes the organization.

Pathetic.
1. Re:And Obama got a Nobel Prize... by TheDarkMaster · 2012-02-15 06:46 · Score: 1
  
  Rich people needs regular massages on the ego... For them it is not enough to be rich, they also want to be "worshiped" even though they are bastards.
  
  --
  Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
Steve Jobs: RIP... by srussia · 2012-02-15 06:13 · Score: 1

...MIX, BURN.

--
Set your phasers on "funky"!
Lifetime achievment in Greed by ThatsNotPudding · 2012-02-15 06:17 · Score: 1

I assumed it was just the MAFIAA's admiration of His Steveness to develop a cult-like following literally willing to stand in line to overpay for product. Given that the MAFIAA takes about ninety cents of every dollar earned by an artist - then sues grandmothers to make up for that dime - he was cut from the same gruesome cloth as they.
The Grammys Matter? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 06:24 · Score: 0

Funny how all the Apple haters seem to think that the Grammys matter. People watch this garbage? Oh yeah, probably the people who listen to the radio for music. =\
Shoutcast and Napster? by future+assassin · 2012-02-15 06:31 · Score: 1

Seems they get no love for introducing music and bedroom radio stations at your finger tips to the masses.

--
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Oh boy. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 06:34 · Score: 0

So the music industry is giving Jobs an award for doing what EVERYONE was telling the industry itself to do TEN YEARS EARLIER when instead of hiring engineers to build an online music platform, they hired lawyers to take down Napster et.al, and bit-illusionists to make bits uncopyable.
By honoring Apple and itunes, they're basically admitting to being idiots!
Ummmm Jobs/Apple did not create iTunes by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 06:35 · Score: 0

Did anyone do their homework?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITunes
They bought a product and their programmers, who still work on it to this day. All they did was relabel it. Yep that deserves a Grammy
divx/xvid NOT more useful on airplanes by SuperKendall · 2012-02-15 06:36 · Score: 2

Also, it doesn't/didn't play divx or xvid (not exactly obscure formats and very useful on airplanes)
I would argue that is not correct.
mp4 is a much more useful format for airplanes - not because of the size of the file (though it is also compact) but because there is general hardware support for decoding - which means MUCH longer battery life, the most important factor for using a device on a plane.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Re:divx/xvid NOT more useful on airplanes by lexman098 · 2012-02-15 06:41 · Score: 1
  
  MUCH longer battery life, the most important factor for using a device on a plane.
  Says you. My battery was fine and the files were already in divx. The convenience of not having to transcode was the most important factor for me.
Seriously by LoudNoiseElitist · 2012-02-15 06:37 · Score: 2, Insightful

Can we let this asshole die already?
Jobs was a sleaze ball by macbeth66 · 2012-02-15 06:45 · Score: 1, Interesting

Maybe now his company will take a closer look at the conditions under which their iCrap manufacturers force upon the slaves.
And to think I admired the man. The more I learn about him and what Apples does, the more disgusted I've become.
Xoom instead of iPad, Droid instead of iPhone and Sansa instead of iPod.
1. Re:Jobs was a sleaze ball by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 08:10 · Score: 0, Informative
  
  Dumbshit.
  Where do you think the Xoom is made? How about Droid? Both made at Foxxcon, same as Apple. Only Apply has had the balls to try to improve the conditions in the factories that make their products. Everyone else is just sitting quiet and hoping people (like you) don't notice that they are using the same factories.
  Or are you just another Apple hater?
2. Re:Jobs was a sleaze ball by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 08:12 · Score: 0
  
  Shaka, when the walls fell.
3. Re:Jobs was a sleaze ball by supersloshy · 2012-02-15 08:14 · Score: 1
  
  Xoom instead of iPad, Droid instead of iPhone and Sansa instead of iPod.
  Disregarding the rest of your post, I have to agree that Sansa makes pretty dang good portable music players. I have a Sansa Clip+ and even though the screen is nothing to brag about it does pretty much everything I want. It plays MP3, WMA, Vorbis (important to me), and even FLAC if you're stubborn enough to waste space with it. I got a 4GB model for around $40-50 (though they sell 8GB for a little bit more) and it's expandable with MicroSD card support. It even does FM radio so you can listen to crappy pop music if that's your thing ;).
  In all seriousness I haven't been happier with a portable media player. For the comparable iPod I'd have to spend much more and I'd get much less. Sure I'd get AAC support but who honestly cares outside of maybe audiophiles? MP3 and Vorbis are more than enough for me.
  
  --
  "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
4. Re:Jobs was a sleaze ball by Truedat · 2012-02-15 08:49 · Score: 0
  Maybe now his company will take a closer look at the conditions under which their Xoom manufacturers force upon the slaves.
  Emphasis mine. Also works well if you substitute any of:
  
  that Xbox you play on
  those nikes you walk in
  that Droid you use
  that Sony tv you watch
  Honestly, if I had to sit down and design a hypocritical post I don't think I could beat yours.
5. Re:Jobs was a sleaze ball by toriver · 2012-02-15 10:12 · Score: 1
  
  When did workers receiving a salary 20% above regional average become "slaves"? Slaves are usually captured and work for nothing, not people who willingly leave their subsistence farming communities in order to make money for their families back home. See the difference?
6. Re:Jobs was a sleaze ball by Anarchduke · 2012-02-16 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  Slaves, as in teenage mandatory "internship" programs
  http://motherboard.vice.com/2012/2/15/foxconn-s-other-dirty-secret-the-world-s-largest-internship-program
  
  --
  who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
Music INDUSTRY by SuperKendall · 2012-02-15 06:45 · Score: 1

The award was for non-performance benefits to the music industry (coded as "field of recording").
Yes music sharing has been around for a while but it taught the industry nothing. Even though that's mostly because they refused to learn...
Jobs/Apple gets the award because they managed to beat it into the industries thick skill that they should WANT to distribute music digitally.
It's more like a "thanks for the intervention" award.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You are too hung up on word "recording" by SuperKendall · 2012-02-15 06:59 · Score: 3, Insightful

"significant contributions, other than performance, to the field of recording"
You are treating it as though it referred to the ENGINEERING of recording.
If you think about what the statement says, it plainly is using "field of recording" to mean the business of recording, i.e. music industry.
Then it makes sense, since Jobs helped the music industry actually make money from digital sale instead of fearing it.
Also supporting that assertion, is the point that the awards body that defined that term is taking it that was as well. That is a plain indication that it's not just about recording engineering.
You could also look at past recipients...

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Kim Dotcom by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 07:18 · Score: 0

Wonder if we'll ever see Kim Dotcom accept a Grammy award...
You guys realize... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 07:46 · Score: 0

He didn't just make iTunes (which is a pretty big fucking deal), but that Apple's software and hardware are very useful in the production of music? I use Apple Logic for everything.
What planet, did you say....? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 08:59 · Score: 0

Oh, well, we all know the music industry is not from this planet.
Who is Steve Jobs? by aaaaaaargh! · 2012-02-15 09:06 · Score: 1

Oh wait ... that's that computer company manager, right?
Now who the fuck is Eddy Cue?
You and everyone who modded you up are stone cold by Brannon · 2012-02-15 10:14 · Score: 1, Informative

morons. Where the fuck do you think the Xoom and Droids are made?
Fucking idiot.
Jobs as music maestro by nonguru · 2012-02-15 13:00 · Score: 1

OMG, that's so ironic. Through iTunes Jobs sets up an alternate distribution system that shafts Music companies - the Grammies being a front for selling more industry product. The Apple product is based off lossy music that sounds like crap on anything more complex than an iPod. To top it off, Steve Jobs is claimed to have preferred LP records. You couldn't get away with making this stuff up.
Yes, you can win a Grammy for software. by Shag · 2012-02-15 13:06 · Score: 1

I don't recall any Grammys going out to other people that created music authoring programs. That includes the programs that professionals use to author their recordings.
Actually, there's a type of Special Merit Award in the Producers/Engineers area, the "Technical Grammy," that's been given out since 1994 to "individuals and/or companies who have made contributions of outstanding technical significance to the recording field." I'm not sure how many of the people and companies listed are on the software side of things specifically - pretty sure 2012 winner Celemony is, and of course 2002 winner Apple, but a lot of the other names are unfamiliar.
See: http://www.grammy.org/recording-academy/producers-and-engineers/awards

--
Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
Not the first. Not even close. by Shag · 2012-02-15 13:23 · Score: 1

http://www.grammy.org/recording-academy/producers-and-engineers/awards indicates that Sony/Philips (1998), Georg Neumann GmbH (1999), AMS Neve plc (2000) and Digidesign (2001) won technical grammies as companies, before Apple. Also, as individuals, Thomas Stockham (1994 - really "the first technical Grammy"), Ray Dolby (1995), Rupert Neve (1997), George Massenburg (1998), Bill Putnam (2000), and Les Paul (2001).
(Wikipedia links provided just in case anyone hasn't heard of some of those winners, or doesn't know what they won for.)

--
Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
I wonder if by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-15 20:01 · Score: 0

anyone has baptized him yet...