Steve Jobs To Receive Grammy Award

The Apple co-founder will be awarded a posthumous award for his contribution and influence on the music industry.

logo
Ultimate Guitar
0

Former Apple CEO Steve Jobs will be awarded a posthumous Grammy award for his contribution and influence on the music industry.

He will be given the Grammy Trustees Award, which is given to individuals who have made a significant contribution to music in areas other than performance.

Jobs' work on iTunes was considered by many to save the music industry from the clutches of illegal downloading, and set a precedent for the world of invisible digital products we are now accustomed to. Others believe iTunes may have contributed to a decline in music revenues, as buyers can choose to purchase individual songs rather than the full record.

Along with computing, he had a lifelong obsession with music, frequently citing Bob Dylan and The Beatles as his favorite artists.

"My model for business is The Beatles," he said in 2003. "There were four guys who kept each others', kind of, negative tendencies in check. They balanced each other, and the total was greater than the sum of the parts. And that's how I see business. You know, great things in business are never done by one person. They're done by a team of people."

Other winners of the award include bandleader Dave Bartholomew and engineer Rudy Van Gelder. They will be presented during Grammy week in February.

"It is an honor to recognize such a diverse group of individuals whose talents and achievements have had an indelible impact on our industry," said the Recording Acadamy's president and CEO Neil Portnow (via Gibson).

It is not the first time Apple has been awarded for its contribution to music. The company was recognized with a technical Grammy in 2002 for it's emerging technological contribution.

185 comments sorted by best / new / date

comments policy
    LaughingWater2
    And im afraid steve jobs counldnt be here tonight so on his behalf to pick up his award here is bill gates
    CronoMagus
    Steve Jobs was like the young Dave Mustaine of the computer world: He was a huge dick because Microsoft was always much more popular than Apple.
    dale-banez
    Ranmanbassist18 wrote: they should make the Grammy holding an apple with a bite in it.
    Do you even know why it's called a Grammy? Because it's a ****ing gramophone.
    Lion_Slicer
    You know, great things in business are never done by one person.
    --Steve Jobs just before winning the 2003 Nobel Irony Prize
    Armagedn
    Makes sense to me. I personally really don't like Apple products, but I can deny the influence. Although Steve Wozniak deserves all the credit for Apple, not Steve Jobs.
    Knucklehead Dyl
    You know, great things in business are never done by one person.
    But they are taken credit for by one person...
    Kueller917
    Zeppelin Addict wrote: Blackberry can't keep up with the Iphone Windows can't keep up with Mac Nothing compares to an Ipod. You've got all kinds of companies across different platforms chasing one company that does everything.. Better. Apple > Everybody else.
    I know a lot of people who prefer alternatives to an iPhone. Windows can keep up with a Mac. There's plenty of uses with it. Only the other OS' like Linux and Unix has less mainstream attention because they aim for a tighter audience. I don't like the iPod. Neither do all my friends. Apple is an important company and very influential to recent technology, but they're not the greatest thing in the world.
    Fingerboy18
    Encouraging kids to get MP3's at 128Kbps instead of full CD quality. NO! No wonder the general population likes shitty music.
    CronoMagus
    ProgJazzMath wrote: jordo246 wrote: CronoMagus wrote: Steve Jobs was like the young Dave Mustaine of the computer world: He was a huge dick because Microsoft was always much more popular than Apple. Except apple was never better than Microsoft, where as Megadeth is now a zillion times better than Metallica Apple completely rapes Microsoft! Please explain to me how Microsoft is better, please. I want to hear your argument. I really really do.
    Apple only rapes Microsoft in Tablets and Smartphones, that's it. When it comes to Desktop computers, Microsoft is the way to go. I'm not going to spend $2600 on an iMac (just because it's pretty) when I can get a Windows computer with THE SAME HARDWARE for $1200. You can try and argue the virus card but that argument will only hold water for a little while longer. The reason Windows has the amount of viruses it does is because it holds 90% of the market share, meaning 90% of all humans on the planet use Windows, not Mac. This means that hackers/crackers will specifically target Windows with new viruses and malware. Now that Macs are getting more and more popular, you can bet your arse that you will start to see a huge wave of viruses targeting your precious Macs. Besides, the only people who get viruses are porn mongers and computer illiterate people who go to sites they shouldn't and try to download stuff they shouldn't. In terms of computing power, they are the same, and if they aren't I can get a much better part for a much better price to replace the old.
    Spychosis
    Motorhed95 wrote: iTunes destroyed the music industry. It used to be that if you're an artist you'd have to fight for shelf space. Now, any old ****tard can put something up an get famous. Every week some new 'gangsta' or bimbo has a number one . . .
    You are just sad that physical stores are going out of business. Digital distribution was already happening without iTunes, that was just the best legal way that set the path for others. Don't blame Apple or Steve Jobs for the inevitable.
    Fingerboy18 wrote: Encouraging kids to get MP3's at 128Kbps instead of full CD quality. NO! No wonder the general population likes shitty music.
    iTunes hasn't sold music in that low quality for YEARS man. YEARS.
    lukas1324
    Of course we will get a bunch of people trollin and bitchin about this. Bottom line, he was good at what he did...as im writing this on a mac xD
    shoule79
    Regardless, there are always exceptions.. I don't like the iPhone either, but it's the general consumers opinion. More people by iPhones. That's a fact. Same goes with the iPod.. Chances are whatever you and your friends use, it's based off the iPod anyway whether you know it or not.
    Actually Droid phones have a larger market share than iPhone and Blackberry combined. iOS is not even close to #1. In the corporate world, its also still Blackberry by a long shot. The iPod is the most popular mp3 player, but it is by no means the original and was a rip off of what came before it. While Jobs was quick to yell at the top of his lungs if he felt ripped off, he quietly never mentioned when he did it or gave the actual creators credit (Mouse + GUI OS = Xerox, Tablets = Microsoft/Panasonic, Smartphone = RIM, iPod = can't think of any other than some Creative Labs ones, but there were a lot of them, etc.).
    Mac vs. Windows, Windows sells more because a PC is half the price of a Mac.. Making that Mac soon worth what you paid for it due to a PC's tendency to slow down, get infected and eventually not work right.. Meaning it must be replaced.
    Windows machines are cheaper, but both PC's and Macs have used the same hardware since Mac switched to Intel processors. Same RAM, hard drives, processors, batteries etc. Rip a Dell and Mac apart and see what I mean. You can guess why one is more expensive (so could Darwin or Barnum). Regarding the slow down...you obviously haven't used any Windows OS since XP (although Vista was a pile), and if you threw out your XP computer because you had a virus...well....you fail, no other word for it (although when a Mac gets a virus, the Mac geniuses usually just format your hard drive and re-install, rather than try to fix it, so I can see where the mentality comes from).
    It's even more true if I play the 'me and my friends' card, in which case.. All my friends either use a Mac or insist that the next time their PC burns out they will get one. Once you go Mac, you never go back.
    I know many people who have went back, myself included (moving my studio to a PC was remarkably easy and meant I no longer had to have two separate computers). They aren't as stable or secure as Linux, and not as flexible as a PC.
    As for aiming for a tighter audience, BS. No company wants to limit their sales by aiming for a small audience. They set a target audience and expand from there..
    Linux isn't a corporate OS, its developed by a developer community who then release it on the internet for FREE. There is no aim for an audience, computer literate people run it because it is just better for them. No one involved in Linux development makes money off of the OS, software or hardware. 80% of the servers on the internet run Linux. Android is also based on Linux, which makes it the most popular mobile Operating System as well. And to be frank, Mac has based their OS Kernel on Linux and Unix since the late 90's, so they too are just another Linux variant (although they don't adhere to the GPL and release their software for free). I generally don't mind Macs, but the fanatical cult of uninformed devoted followers turns me off.
    LordArbiter
    Jobs should get a nod, but Apple should get the credit- all the engineers who designed and literally rewrote the book on how music sales worked. Jobs is given waaaay too much credit, but Apple as a whole should be given at least some sort of a nod.
    CoreysMonster
    I especially love what Jobs did for the independant music scene by offering them a cheap and easy-to-use platform to sell their musi-- oh no wait, they didn't. That was Bandcamp. Because Steve Jobs did nothing to help anyone in the music industry besides himself.
    Motorhed95
    iTunes destroyed the music industry. It used to be that if you're an artist you'd have to fight for shelf space. Now, any old ****tard can put something up an get famous. Every week some new 'gangsta' or bimbo has a number one . . .
    Zeppelin Addict
    doive wrote: Roger Daltrey (singer of the Who) made a very good point about the current music industry and how apple is destroying it: "Music publishing has always been a form of banking in many ways, but in cooperation with record labels active artists have always received from the music industry banking system more than banking. They've gotten 1. editorial guidance 2. financial support 3. creative nurture 4. manufacturing 5. publishing 6. marketing 7. distribution 8. payment of royalties (the banking) Today, if we look solely at iTunes, we see a publishing model that offers only the last two items as a guarantee, distribution and banking, with some marketing thrown in sometimes at the whim of the folks at Apple." In other words iTunes is destroying music by taking the profits of the music industry without putting any creative input into it. iTunes take an identical cut no matter what the music, so long as there is demand for music iTunes will make money so they have no interest in promoting the best music out there
    As much as I respect Mr. Daltrey this is BS. Piracy is destroying the industry, not Apple.. Copyright laws haven't been updated since 1976 and therefore do not encompass modern technology. Fix that, end piracy, artists make their money. As for only meeting 2 out of the 8 points.. APPLE ISN'T A LABEL!!!! Editorial guidance, financial support, creative nurture, manufacturing, publishing, marketing - Label work... Or in this day and age, do it yourself!! Indie revolution anyone? distribution, payment of royalties (the banking) - iTunes job and the law.. With this logic any store that sells product it doesn't make is in the wrong to and thus, destroying this world!! Finally, they have no interest in promoting the 'best music out there' because that statement is ambiguous and completely subjective to the listener... Ask 100 people about the best music out there and you'll almost surely get 100 different answers. Mass market companies cater to just that. The mass market. Meaning they cannot play favourite to any music except for maybe what sells. I really hope Daltrey wasn't the one who said all of this.. I'm afraid if that's the case he's starting to lose it..
    georgebushguy79
    Scenario of a typical Apple customer: "New 9th generation Ipod touch released!" Apple commercial: Now has camera and video recording but we are still going to charge you just as much as you paid or more for the one you already have! ... While the Microsoft customer is happy and he spends hundreds of dollars less.
    ProgJazzMath
    Oh and something you guys might not realize, macs are encased in an aluminum shell. Tell that to your plastic towers and laptops that would shatter if you dropped them on the ground.
    sgwizard92
    At least this isn't as bad as Obama getting the Nobel Prize XD. It's close though. What a silly thing to do.
    come2gether
    I swear, this world is full of self-absorbed opinionated jerks who just love to complain. Bottom line, whether he was a genius, a marketer, a visionary, a jerk, pushy, whatever he was... he changed the world of music forever. Who cares if you don't agree with what he did or how he did it? A ton of people have benifited from his existence. Who cares if vinyl is virtually obsolete? There was a time when people like you who are arguing on here were the ones with the newest technology and older people were talking about how this new thing is bad and blah blah blah. He changed the world. Appreciate it you terrible people.
    Zeppelin Addict
    anecsey wrote: Yeah, for sure, Primus is from the 2000, Opeth too and Red Hot Chili Peppers as well. Come on, man. What was the last time, you see a bunch of excellent records like the 90s... try por example 1991: nevermind,black album, rust in peace, arise, use your ilussion, vulgar display of power, etc etc etc.
    Hmm lets see... Oh yea http://www.guitarworld.com/guitar-worlds... s-2011 Bunch of great albums there.. Bunch more coming out next year.. There isn't 1 year that is superior in music. That's completely ridiculous and close minded. It's not like bands get together and plan to release a great album all in the same year, in fact theoretically they should want to spread them out so that they don't have to compete... Also realize that greatness needs to stand time.. Kind of hard to judge albums of this decade when they haven't been around close to as long. It's a completely irrelevant argument.
    anecsey wrote: Now what your have? A lot of good bands from myspace. I dont buy that shit. It doesnt work for me.
    You are so self-contridicting it's unreal.. You say that and then this..
    anecsey wrote: I listen to Dark Suns, Suns of Tundra, Natas, Fears, Septembre, and a lot of bands from myspace and such, bands youll never heard about,
    The ****? I don't think you even know what you're saying.. You're one self-centred prick if you think nobody knows about the bands you listen to. Thinking you can tell ME what I have and haven't heard.. GTFO.
    anecsey wrote: Theres no new wave of music whatsoever.
    Ignorance at its best... It's like I'm talking to a child.
    anecsey wrote: So what you have is easy production bussiness, simply recording process, easy distribution, and public know?? ZERO.
    Which leads to more readily available music for people who want it. You're one self-centred prick if you think nobody knows about the bands you listen to. Thinking you can tell ME what I have and haven't heard.. GTFO.
    anecsey wrote: Count the numbers of the fans of Opeth and they will be 0.009% of the fans who Dream Theater had in 1997.
    I strongly disagree, again your ignorant. Check your facts.
    anecsey wrote: What I mean, is the rock needs the media too, and the media in all the world, is fill with shit.
    anecsey wrote: but still, I will never see them live, and I will never see them on the TV. All I know, this is like even the good musicians are not recognized.
    And it is because of the "media in all the world, is FILLED (not fill..) with shit" that rock and metal is better off without the media. It's underground, uncommercialized and the bands as well as true fans like it that way. I don't need my favourite band to be plastered all over billboards and TV, that just seems like egotistical assurance that what I like is good because everybody else likes it. The bands themselves are filled with musicians who care about making music for the love of music. Not making a dollar.
    anecsey wrote: And, I would act immaturely, but Dark Suns, one of t he bands you dont know a ****, are far superior than Opeth (And yes, they are a modern progressive metal band)
    One sec..
    anecsey wrote: And, I am acting immaturely, but Dark Suns, one of t he bands you dont know a ****, are far superior than Opeth (And yes, they are a modern progressive metal band)
    Fixed. Say what you want, chief... No band is better than any other band out there. Good music is good music.
    thebigredjj10
    codyjt5150 wrote: i bet all the people talking shit about steve own an iPod. so shut the **** up you dumbasses before you think to say something more retarded.
    Yes I own an Ipod. It's not really a revolutionary idea. It's simply a device that plays music files, it's just the best selling one. So regardless of whether I own one or not I think this is silly. Steve Jobs didn't tinker in his basement trying to build the perfect Ipod or Ipad as some people seem to think. He ran a large company that succeeded. I'm not trying to knock the guy, but people act as if he was a super genius solving the worlds problems and creating the most innovative stuff. Creating "genius" ipad was really delayed ten years as touch screens aren't a new idea, they just hold on to the idea long enough so they can sell the shit out of whatever product they currently have. Seriously people, he was just a guy.
    SanSalvador
    Steve jobs is a joke. All he was, was a bastard in a suit...Every couple of months or so, iPod comes out with a new iOS version on a new ipod touch/phone that is hardly any better than the previous version, and makes you pay for a brand new phone rather than being able to trade in for an upgrade...
    thebyccenter
    damn, so much people talking too much bullcrap ... first of all ... music got downloaded before there was itunes, so yes, he kinda saved the music industrie. this was the beginning of a new way purchasing music and other companies jumped on the bandwagon. by the way, more music can exposed to the public ... indie labels don't have the money to sell thousands of copies ... so the digital world alllowed more bands, labels to release more music. second, you don't get any mp3 files from itunes ... you get aif files, a non compressed music file ... similiar like wave. lots of people also think that some day, there will be no cd anymore. well, wrong ... the cd is 30 years old, and it is still the number one medium out there. there are lot's of reason, why the cd stays to be the number one medium for the music industrie. in my opinion, awards are bullshit ... look at the oscars or even the golden globes. i don't give a damn who gets an award and who not ... by the end, it is all about the money.
    doive
    Roger Daltrey (singer of the Who) made a very good point about the current music industry and how apple is destroying it: "Music publishing has always been a form of banking in many ways, but in cooperation with record labels active artists have always received from the music industry banking system more than banking. They've gotten 1. editorial guidance 2. financial support 3. creative nurture 4. manufacturing 5. publishing 6. marketing 7. distribution 8. payment of royalties (the banking) Today, if we look solely at iTunes, we see a publishing model that offers only the last two items as a guarantee, distribution and banking, with some marketing thrown in sometimes at the whim of the folks at Apple." In other words iTunes is destroying music by taking the profits of the music industry without putting any creative input into it. iTunes take an identical cut no matter what the music, so long as there is demand for music iTunes will make money so they have no interest in promoting the best music out there
    ds24601
    I don't agree with this at all. All he really did with iTunes, legality aside, was take something that lots of people were already doing for free and make people pay for it. A smart business decision, yes, but I would hardly say it "saved" the music industry. I do not know a single person who uses the iTunes store--people who want to pay for music buy CDs and those who don't torrent it. They're only doing this because he recently died and it will look good on their part. There are people far more deserving of an honouring for their contribution to music than Steve Jobs. (I know it's the music industry technically but the Grammy's are supposed to be about celebrating the musical achievements of musicians, not the industry itself)
    Dumpster510
    The Grammys once again showing their irrelevance. Posthumously giving an award to a non-musician? Really? Oh wait, I forgot, this is the same organization that gave the best metal album award to Jethro Tull over Metallica in 89....oh yea.
    Apples on Cacti
    Armagedn wrote: Makes sense to me. I personally really don't like Apple products, but I can deny the influence. Although Steve Wozniak deserves all the credit for Apple, not Steve Jobs.
    Not particularly. Wozniak was always just the programmer, but Jobs was the one with the ideas and the vision. Also, Wozniak was not the one who pulled Apple out of its almost irreversible falling point. :/
    nnb
    I honestly don't get why people don't like apple products, or should I say people who "hate" them. I mean, look back at the last 10-15 years and see who much they have influenced everything, most touch based products are based on the platform started by the iphone/ipod touch, same with tablets...when it comes to laptops, I have a low-end macbook and honestly it was the best investment I ever made in terms of laptops and I doubt I'll ever buy another windows based laptop. Anyway, getting off topic...truth is, steve jobs might have saved the music industry or he may have helped degraded and help create his cheap disposable music culture we have today. Valid points can be made for both. What no one can denie is he changed the landscape of the music industry.
    Eirien
    jaapnac wrote: iTunes ****ed up the music industry, Steven Wilson can explain
    Yeah, while producing his albums on a Mac. I hate iTunes and iPod culture too, but Macs made it possible for thousands of artists to record music well from their own homes with no label backing. That could be worth an award, even if more people record on PCs now.
    slipknotnskullz
    CronoMagus wrote: Steve Jobs was like the young Dave Mustaine of the computer world: He was a huge dick because Microsoft was always much more popular than Apple.
    Except Megadeth is actually much better than Metallica...
    74SLIP26KNOT
    People saying that without Steve Jobs we would be behind in tech often don't know about Dennis Richie, take a look at this vid:
    Zeppelin Addict
    TimTheWizard wrote: why didn't they give him this when he was still alive? It's so typical to give whatever award shit to a dead man just because they're famous... Look at MJ
    Wrong place to troll MJ. Get back under the bridge that is Youtube. Inexperienced troll needs experience..
    CronoMagus
    georgebushguy79 wrote: Scenario of a typical Apple customer: "New 9th generation Ipod touch released!" Apple commercial: Now has camera and video recording but we are still going to charge you just as much as you paid or more for the one you already have! ... While the Microsoft customer is happy and he spends hundreds of dollars less.
    Exactly man. Apple just has good advertising, that's all. It knows how to target the more computer illiterate people with flashy commercials and colorful pretty devices.
    Zeppelin Addict
    shoule79 wrote: Actually Droid phones have a larger market share than iPhone and Blackberry combined. iOS is not even close to #1. In the corporate world, its also still Blackberry by a long shot. The iPod is the most popular mp3 player, but it is by no means the original and was a rip off of what came before it. While Jobs was quick to yell at the top of his lungs if he felt ripped off, he quietly never mentioned when he did it or gave the actual creators credit (Mouse + GUI OS = Xerox, Tablets = Microsoft/Panasonic, Smartphone = RIM, iPod = can't think of any other than some Creative Labs ones, but there were a lot of them, etc.). Windows machines are cheaper, but both PC's and Macs have used the same hardware since Mac switched to Intel processors. Same RAM, hard drives, processors, batteries etc. Rip a Dell and Mac apart and see what I mean. You can guess why one is more expensive (so could Darwin or Barnum). Regarding the slow down...you obviously haven't used any Windows OS since XP (although Vista was a pile), and if you threw out your XP computer because you had a virus...well....you fail, no other word for it (although when a Mac gets a virus, the Mac geniuses usually just format your hard drive and re-install, rather than try to fix it, so I can see where the mentality comes from). I know many people who have went back, myself included (moving my studio to a PC was remarkably easy and meant I no longer had to have two separate computers). They aren't as stable or secure as Linux, and not as flexible as a PC. Linux isn't a corporate OS, its developed by a developer community who then release it on the internet for FREE. There is no aim for an audience, computer literate people run it because it is just better for them. No one involved in Linux development makes money off of the OS, software or hardware. 80% of the servers on the internet run Linux. Android is also based on Linux, which makes it the most popular mobile Operating System as well. And to be frank, Mac has based their OS Kernel on Linux and Unix since the late 90's, so they too are just another Linux variant (although they don't adhere to the GPL and release their software for free). I generally don't mind Macs, but the fanatical cult of uninformed devoted followers turns me off.
    Oops, my mistake. Sorry, I completely forgot about Android >..< I only compared RIM and Apple.. Touche. But, I NEVER once said that iPod was first... I said pretty much everything now is based off of it because it greatly improved and popularized the mp3 player. In fact I never made one mention of Apple being first for anything.. I was making the argument that one company is competing at the top of all of these platforms against a bunch of.. specialty companies (for lack of better term?) who focus on 1 or 2 platforms. In theory a wider focus shouldn't be as successful, which goes to show how well Apple has done. That part obviously never made it across as I'm being made out to be an "uninformed devoted follower". A statement in itself that is uninformed.. Physically while parts may be the same, the way they run really isn't and that's what matters in the end. We could both be given an identical pile of sticks and some string to makes bows and arrows and if your design performs better, then it probably is better. Better is obviously ambiguous when it comes to computers though, as they can do so many different things. I've got friends who have multiple computers and run Windows and Mac. They largely prefer their Mac unless they want to play some games... Mind you most of my friends are music industry students (so you can see where I'm coming from) and Mac happens to be superior when it comes to producing media. Not just audio, but video to. As somebody said above, 9 in 10 studios have a Mac in them. While it may not be quite that high, check any up to date studio out there, it will most certainly be majority. I can admit I am not well versed with Linux and so I was not aware that it was a free platform that didn't try for any market share. If that is the case though, it seems kind of irrelevant to this conversation. Don't get me wrong. I'm not some Windows hater, Mac fanboy. I despise the very sort. I'm just making what I see to be a fair argument. Not everything is black and white, there is middle ground. See the world in it's colour. (And before I'm crucified once again for being misunderstood, that last comment was NOT a demeaning shot at you but rather a general statement to everybody who tries to see things one way or another.)
    Våd Hamster
    Never understood the point of giving anything to dead people except burials. It's not like they're gonna appreciate it y'know.
    Kueller917
    I've also heard some very negative things about Pro Tools running on Windows. Never confirmed any myself since I've never used the program (I prefer Reaper or Cubase) but that might also be a reason as to why it's used on a Mac.
    MrKyran
    wembly wrote: Most of the music people listen too was made on a mac.
    This guy has 12 downvotes. For no reason at all. Music industry standard software? Logic Pro... Made by Mac. Logic is a pile of piss to get working on a PC, so, most people buy a Mac. I prefer PC's. But make all my music on Mac's why? That's the way it's done...
    Zan595
    I'm typing this out on a PC while listening to my iPod. Can't we just be friends?
    im not mental
    ProgJazzMath wrote: Steve Jobs is a legend and you guys bashing him are a bunch of ass wipes. Have some ****ing respect. He has had a HUGE impact on the music industry whether you want to realize it or not and in my opinion, he totally deserves this.
    quoted for truth.
    jordo246 wrote: I have a Blackberry phone, all it has is a 16 GB micro SD card and that carries all the music I need, the quality is also very good, people who think Ipods are untouchable are people who have never tried an alternative.
    until google music for android came out, there was no way i was able to carry 80 GB of music in my pocket other than my ipod classic. even then, streams can't go everywhere, buffer, and eat up 2 GB data packages. this is why ipod classics are still better than the alternatives.
    Chad11491
    Zeppelin Addict wrote: shoule79 wrote: Actually Droid phones have a larger market share than iPhone and Blackberry combined. iOS is not even close to #1. In the corporate world, its also still Blackberry by a long shot. The iPod is the most popular mp3 player, but it is by no means the original and was a rip off of what came before it. While Jobs was quick to yell at the top of his lungs if he felt ripped off, he quietly never mentioned when he did it or gave the actual creators credit (Mouse + GUI OS = Xerox, Tablets = Microsoft/Panasonic, Smartphone = RIM, iPod = can't think of any other than some Creative Labs ones, but there were a lot of them, etc.). Windows machines are cheaper, but both PC's and Macs have used the same hardware since Mac switched to Intel processors. Same RAM, hard drives, processors, batteries etc. Rip a Dell and Mac apart and see what I mean. You can guess why one is more expensive (so could Darwin or Barnum). Regarding the slow down...you obviously haven't used any Windows OS since XP (although Vista was a pile), and if you threw out your XP computer because you had a virus...well....you fail, no other word for it (although when a Mac gets a virus, the Mac geniuses usually just format your hard drive and re-install, rather than try to fix it, so I can see where the mentality comes from). I know many people who have went back, myself included (moving my studio to a PC was remarkably easy and meant I no longer had to have two separate computers). They aren't as stable or secure as Linux, and not as flexible as a PC. Linux isn't a corporate OS, its developed by a developer community who then release it on the internet for FREE. There is no aim for an audience, computer literate people run it because it is just better for them. No one involved in Linux development makes money off of the OS, software or hardware. 80% of the servers on the internet run Linux. Android is also based on Linux, which makes it the most popular mobile Operating System as well. And to be frank, Mac has based their OS Kernel on Linux and Unix since the late 90's, so they too are just another Linux variant (although they don't adhere to the GPL and release their software for free). I generally don't mind Macs, but the fanatical cult of uninformed devoted followers turns me off. Oops, my mistake. Sorry, I completely forgot about Android >..< I only compared RIM and Apple.. Touche. But, I NEVER once said that iPod was first... I said pretty much everything now is based off of it because it greatly improved and popularized the mp3 player. In fact I never made one mention of Apple being first for anything.. I was making the argument that one company is competing at the top of all of these platforms against a bunch of.. specialty companies (for lack of better term?) who focus on 1 or 2 platforms. In theory a wider focus shouldn't be as successful, which goes to show how well Apple has done. That part obviously never made it across as I'm being made out to be an "uninformed devoted follower". A statement in itself that is uninformed.. Physically while parts may be the same, the way they run really isn't and that's what matters in the end. We could both be given an identical pile of sticks and some string to makes bows and arrows and if your design performs better, then it probably is better. Better is obviously ambiguous when it comes to computers though, as they can do so many different things. I've got friends who have multiple computers and run Windows and Mac. They largely prefer their Mac unless they want to play some games... Mind you most of my friends are music industry students (so you can see where I'm coming from) and Mac happens to be superior when it comes to producing media. Not just audio, but video to. As somebody said above, 9 in 10 studios have a Mac in them. While it may not be quite that high, check any up to date studio out there, it will most certainly be majority. I can admit I am not well versed with Linux and so I was not aware that it was a free platform that didn't try for any market share. If that is the case though, it seems kind of irrelevant to this conversation. Don't get me wrong. I'm not some Windows hater, Mac fanboy. I despise the very sort. I'm just making what I see to be a fair argument. Not everything is black and white, there is middle ground. See the world in it's colour. (And before I'm crucified once again for being misunderstood, that last comment was NOT a demeaning shot at you but rather a general statement to everybody who tries to see things one way or another.)
    not to be rude, but you have no idea how computer parts are put together or work. Mac's and PC's use the EXACT SAME PARTS. There is only ONE WAY to put them together. Apple does not have magic fairy dust to sprinkle on them to make them better. There are no alternative plugs on motherboards/CPU's/PSU's/GPU's/Harddrives/etc. you can only assemble them in ONE way. Apple products are not assembled in any way better than PC's.