Still, to me his track record also includes numerous cases where he was plain wrong and/or heavily biased - e.g. he was well known for trashing iPhone/iPad and praising Nokia until some time ago when he suddenly changed camps and now does the complete opposite thing.
So chill out a litte with the hating. (Of course, given that I've owned and used almost exclusively Apple computers for the last thirty years, everything I write may very well be just as subject to the same "fanboy" well-poisoning gambit.)
A recent linked piece nailed Apple's strengths and weaknesses: If Steve uses it, it generally rocks. If it doesn't, it could very well blow e.g. Ping.
What matters to me is good vs bad journalism - ability to acknowledge one's mistakes, checking one's sources, not trashing one's opponents, etc. etc.
One of them is not. It's been long obvious Symbian was a dead end. Phones are getting more powerful and Symbian was targeted to very simple chips. As processors got more powerful, it became comparatively harder to scale Symbian up than to simply use Linux or other Unix like kernel that would be perfectly at home on a 32-bit, multi-megabyte RISC machine (more or less like the first Unix workstation I had on my desk).