I like where he points out that a source gave him info that was apparently bullshit and he says that 'Any future information from this source will be noted accordingly.'
I agree, this sort of accountability is one of the reasons that I enjoy following Gruber's writing, and think that the "fanboy" label given to him by some detractors is not deserved.
Gruber makes many good choices, this being one of them. But his writing is overwhelmingly pro-Apple. You can call it being a fanboy or not, it's up to you.
Separately, I'd probably be as inclined to believe the source as I would Apple's public response.
> I'd probably be as inclined to believe the source as I would Apple's public response.
In turn, I say this: You are given two statements: One is a written and formal statement from Apple to the FCC. It's on record. If information comes to light in the future that contradicts this statement all h*ll will break loose for the company.
The other is from Gruber claiming that some anonymous person claimed something to the contrary of Apple's statement.
Given the two, you are inclined to believe someone who Gruber claims claims something. Where do you think you fit on a continuum from pro-Apple to neutral to anti-Apple?
Ah, the general case. I can go along with this, I lean that way by nature as well. That being said, I recognize a flaw in my argument: I'm presenting a false dichotomy. In a case like this it's also quite acceptable to disbelieve Apple and the "little birdie."
No, I don't think that you can say that Gruber is pro-Apple. It's more accurate to say that he is pro Apple products. Apple the company cops a fair bit of criticism from him, including on subjects such as the App Store, DRM, pricing etc, but Gruber explains in detail exactly why he is so enamoured by they products.
Well, someone did make a comment under the other post that Apple answer didn't preclude the possibility that AT&T called up Apple and said, "Don't approve the Google Voice App."
