He's a blatant apple fanboy, but unlike most others he's not a stupid fanboy.
Haven't notice an actual big Microsoft announcement get far less votes than Gruber's snide and often factually wrong take on it? It's the community of fanboys and worshippers he has created.
Sure, that might explain why Thurott's articles don't make the front page and Gruber's do, but does it explain why they're completely hellbanned from HN from even appearing on the new page where people can actually see them and vote on it if they find it interesting?
Very nice. I think tikhonj's comment from below applies better here instead.
There's a place for objective journalism but it's not the only way. What Gruber does is more of a specialized type of journalism. If you've already made up your mind you don't necessarily want to waste time with the other points of view. For example if you really like basketball you would probably prefer to read a blog that focuses on basketball instead of a blog that's comparing basketball to other sports in an objective way. It would really be a waste of your time since you've already decided you like basketball.
When it comes to relatively unimportant things like technology, sports, food, video games, your favorite brand of soda, etc there's a lot less value in objective journalism. I prefer specialized journalism in that context. I'm more interested in the opinions and thoughts of someone who shares my viewpoint because they are more likely to focus on the details that are important to me. We're also likely starting from a common point so not every tiny detail has to be explained verbosely. We all kind of 'get it' so there's no need to rehash it. His comparison of the iPhone 3GS->4 for example is something an Apple user going to understand immediately. He doesn't have to write 300 words describing the contrast using examples of a bunch of products I've never used because he has a reasonable expectation that I probably haven't used them. So why bother?
I don't quite understand why people are so hung up on objective journalism in this context. This isn't reporting on the Watergate scandal or something. It's a consumer product. It's Coke vs. Pepsi. I don't think Gruber needs to aspire to be Edward R. Murrow here. He can proudly write for the home-team if he wants to. Another blog that is anti/pro/objective/etc is only a click away. He certainly doesn't tout himself as being the authoritative beacon of objective journalism.
Really? Lets look at a recent example of such exemplary commentary:
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2012/03/12/xyboard
That's just one example, his constant hate of and sneering at not just anything Android but anything Google is what is exemplary and shows that he is a fanboy that like to play his fanbase for fun and profit, and his readers just lap it up.
Maybe there is a new word in here someplace - because there is certainly a career to be made out of it, although he could just be the modern Cringly/Dvorak.
FanOpp?
EDIT: I love being downvoted for an honest and direct reply to a question.
Early PC Mag, Dvorak had a great column. Geeky insight, pretty good BS detector. Now he's just a crank with a libertarian vibe. Haven't read him in years. I actually met him once, early web days. Great guy. Learned he was a serious amateur civil war historian. Liking Dvorak (the guy) as much as I do, I stuck with him for a long time, hoping he'd get back to having fun. Oh well.
Personally - I find them all to be the same; Opportunistic writers (Yes, they all have skill - I was not disputing this fact) who have found a niche in hte market where they can fill it.
I think ANY successful technology writer must be a fan boi to certain extent -- If all they ever did was shit on everything, then why read them?
I think that fan boi, as a term, is just a modern (hipster, even) way of saying that we have a product evangelist.
I do think that both cringley and dvorak were very much in this role early on - maybe they were much better writers, though, in their prime.