I've seen many misleading charts from him that seemed very believable and indeed many people believed him. He's very good at twisting the data to show what he wants and "make sense".
The most infamous one I remember is when he used LG, Samsung and a few other companies profit and revenue data to show that they are losing or not making much money from Android, when he never actually showed the profit and revenue data for the phones themselves.
He took the whole profit of the companies, and even though it was still early 2010, when these companies didn't even start using Android on a very big scale, he managed to make it look like the companies are doing so poorly because of Android, when in fact Android had nothing to do with it and it couldn't since it wasn't used much by them at the time. Many, many people bought his "analysis" and took for granted that when manufacturers use Android their phone business performance is bad, which is completely false.
Of course, he conveniently omitted HTC who at the time was selling mainly Android phones and they were doing very well because of it.
A cursory glance at his articles shows that he's a completely biased Apple fanboy. Not really going to expect any objectivity from him. All he does is praise Apple and poke fun at Android and other competitors. Like Gruber, he has cultivated an audience and tells them what they want to hear to drive page hits and revenue. It seems to be a highly successful business model, atleast for Gruber. That's the real reason they write what they write, regardless of what they actually think.
Comments
I've seen many misleading charts from him that seemed very believable and indeed many people believed him. He's very good at twisting the data to show what he wants and "make sense".
The most infamous one I remember is when he used LG, Samsung and a few other companies profit and revenue data to show that they are losing or not making much money from Android, when he never actually showed the profit and revenue data for the phones themselves.
He took the whole profit of the companies, and even though it was still early 2010, when these companies didn't even start using Android on a very big scale, he managed to make it look like the companies are doing so poorly because of Android, when in fact Android had nothing to do with it and it couldn't since it wasn't used much by them at the time. Many, many people bought his "analysis" and took for granted that when manufacturers use Android their phone business performance is bad, which is completely false.
Of course, he conveniently omitted HTC who at the time was selling mainly Android phones and they were doing very well because of it.
A cursory glance at his articles shows that he's a completely biased Apple fanboy. Not really going to expect any objectivity from him. All he does is praise Apple and poke fun at Android and other competitors. Like Gruber, he has cultivated an audience and tells them what they want to hear to drive page hits and revenue. It seems to be a highly successful business model, atleast for Gruber. That's the real reason they write what they write, regardless of what they actually think.