Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Steve Jobs Awarded Posthumous Grammy

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the unreleased-jobs-dubstep-record-out-next-week dept.

Music 176

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.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Sigh (2, Insightful)

Wolfling1 (1808594) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046077)

What a crock. Did we expect any better from the music industry?

Re:Sigh (4, Interesting)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046107)

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.

Re:Sigh (1, Offtopic)

poena.dare (306891) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046187)

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.

Re:Sigh (4, Informative)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046327)

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.

Re:Sigh (3, Insightful)

msheekhah (903443) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046447)

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.

Re:Sigh (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046749)

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.

Re:Sigh (3, Informative)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046589)

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!

Re:Sigh (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046219)

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.

Re:Sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046237)

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.

Re:Sigh (2)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046393)

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*...

Re:Sigh (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046817)

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.

Re:Sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046109)

The answer is yeah, we did.

Re:Sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046115)

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. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Sigh (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046263)

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. [wikipedia.org]

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.

Re:Sigh (1)

squidflakes (905524) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046531)

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.

Re:Sigh (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046855)

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....

Re:Sigh (0)

paimin (656338) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046155)

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.

Re:Sigh (3, Insightful)

Karellen (104380) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046321)

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...)

Re:Sigh (5, Informative)

paimin (656338) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046943)

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.

Re:Sigh (1)

Stewie241 (1035724) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046985)

Maybe it was Garage Band which apparently is half decent? I dunno.

Re:Sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046211)

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).

Re:Sigh (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046901)

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.

Re:Sigh (2)

19thNervousBreakdown (768619) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046957)

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?

Re:Sigh (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046217)

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?

Wrong. (3, Insightful)

Picass0 (147474) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046259)

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.

Re:Wrong. (2)

ciderbrew (1860166) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046489)

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.

Re:Wrong. (1)

future assassin (639396) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047285)

>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.

Re:Wrong. (1)

hitmark (640295) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047315)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_audio_player [wikipedia.org]

Seems there was quite the selection.

Re:Wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39047571)

The pre-iPod players had tiny calculator screens and crappy controls. Not the in the same league as even the 1st iPod.

Re:Sigh (4, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046325)

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.

Re:Sigh (3, Insightful)

GaratNW (978516) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046751)

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.

Re:Sigh (5, Informative)

joh (27088) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047179)

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.

Re:Sigh (1)

GaratNW (978516) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047631)

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.

Re:Sigh (1)

quacking duck (607555) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047605)

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.

Re:Sigh (1)

sqldr (838964) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047135)

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.

Re:Sigh (3, Interesting)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047433)

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.

Re:Sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39047223)

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.

Re:Sigh (1)

lexman098 (1983842) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047333)

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.

divx/xvid NOT more useful on airplanes (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047541)

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.

Re:divx/xvid NOT more useful on airplanes (1)

lexman098 (1983842) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047617)

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.

Re:Sigh (1)

hitmark (640295) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047355)

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.

Re:Sigh (1)

future assassin (639396) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047413)

>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/ [warftp.org] and shares.

Re:Sigh (2)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046613)

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.

Re:Sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39047281)

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.

Re:Sigh (1)

sqldr (838964) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047115)

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.

Oh goodie. (1, Flamebait)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046135)

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

Re:Oh goodie. (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046203)

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.

Re:Oh goodie. (1)

Espectr0 (577637) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046475)

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.

Re:Oh goodie. (1)

ciderbrew (1860166) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046525)

Amazon will get a book award next week. Man opens a record shop, wins Grammy doesn't see right.

Re:Oh goodie. (2)

Reverberant (303566) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046537)

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).

Re:Oh goodie. (1)

Ameryll (2390886) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046549)

Or for his contributions to Pixar.

Steve Jobs: RIP... (1)

srussia (884021) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047165)

...MIX, BURN.

Lifetime achievment in Greed (1)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047221)

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.

Re:Oh goodie. (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047459)

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?

Re:Oh goodie. (1)

x1r8a3k (1170111) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046461)

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.

Uh, what? (3, Insightful)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046143)

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!!!!

Re:Uh, what? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046179)

iTunes, dumbshit.

Re:Uh, what? (1, Insightful)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046293)

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.

Re:Uh, what? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046379)

Napster = theft from music industry. iTunes = business for music industry.

Eat shit, you fucking cretin.

Re:Uh, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046555)

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 !

Re:Uh, what? (1, Insightful)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046639)

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>

Re:Uh, what? (0)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047293)

Oh, so his Grammy-worthy contribution to music was creating a fucking store?

Yes, dumbshit.

Fanboy mods! (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046415)

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!

Re:Fanboy mods! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39047555)

Well, well, well. The fanbois are still alive and well here on Slashdot

You don't need to stray from the flock to be a dumb-shit. Not knowing what iTunes is is sufficient.

Re:Uh, what? (1, Interesting)

SecurityGuy (217807) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046577)

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.

Re:Uh, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046201)

I wish I had a username so I could mod you up...hilarious

Re:Uh, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046423)

It's along the vein of Obama winning a peace prize. The world is seriously fucked up.

Re:Uh, what? (1)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046673)

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?!

Re:Uh, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39047335)

When's the Vatican going to beatify him?

I see what you did there.

Did Napster get one too? (5, Insightful)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046169)

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...

Re:Did Napster get one too? (1)

bughunter (10093) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046317)

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.

Re:Did Napster get one too? (2)

squidflakes (905524) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046605)

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.

Re:Did Napster get one too? (4, Funny)

halcyon1234 (834388) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047177)

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

Did I miss it? (1, Insightful)

yourlord (473099) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046173)

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.

Re:Did I miss it? (4, Funny)

Sez Zero (586611) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046353)

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.”

Re:Did I miss it? (0)

yourlord (473099) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046809)

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.

RIAA loves Apple now (1)

StripedCow (776465) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046191)

And this makes me wonder what slashdotters are supposed to do now?

--
Apple: paywalling the internet

They should give it to the record execs... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046199)

They are advancing the cause of music too, right?

Sosumi (2)

bughunter (10093) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046275)

And to think, Apple (under Jobs' first stint as CEO) taunted record companies with just one note [zot.org] .

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 wub the Grammys. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046307)

'cause Skrillex (of all people) won two of them, you see.

wub wub wub wub wub

Re:I wub the Grammys. (1)

WilyCoder (736280) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047201)

Skrillex won a grammy?

I don't want to live on this planet anymore...

No one who has anything to do with itunes (1)

slaker (53818) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046331)

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

Re:No one who has anything to do with itunes (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046497)

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.

Meh. From an Apple fanboi. (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046455)

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.

After the awards ceremony (1)

Vinegar Joe (998110) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046505)

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

Re:After the awards ceremony (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046551)

Too early, mate.. Just too early.

the real reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046529)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046657)

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?

He's dead, Jim (1)

xx_chris (524347) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046663)

This is not Slashdot level news.

This ranks up there with Obama's Nobel (1, Insightful)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046715)

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

And Obama got a Nobel Prize... (2, Insightful)

sdguero (1112795) | more than 2 years ago | (#39046793)

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.

Minus 4, T8oll) (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39046967)

befo8e playing to Dead. It is a dead

The Grammys Matter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39047341)

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? (1)

future assassin (639396) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047457)

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

Oh boy. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39047519)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39047537)

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

Seriously (2, Insightful)

LoudNoiseElitist (1016584) | more than 2 years ago | (#39047563)

Can we let this asshole die already?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?