If you read his blog, I don't know how you could possibly classify Gruber as someone who does "reporting". It's quite clear that he is not your traditional reporter nor does he ever claim to be one. His pieces are personal opinion pieces with a personal voice. Whether his opinions jibe with Apple or with the anti-Apple crowd is besides the point. What matters is that his voice is authentic and provides unique insight into the world of Apple (not always but often enough) - which is more than what you could say for many other blogs covering Apple or any other technology company.
I disagree with a key point in this article that postulates that Series A investors have taken on as much risk as Series B investors.
The mere fact of knowing that other investors - especially if they are large and famous ones - have already invested in a business by itself reduced your risk. Having 3 years worth of information about a company vs 2 years worth of information reduces your risk. There is more to risk than the binary "unproven business model" vs "proven business model" that the author seem to make it out to be.
The author's own words: "Having said all that, I believe that it requires a lot of courage to be the first to invest in an unproven business."
Steve Yegge said this in the comments to his last blog post:
"The short answer for why I'm going into blog-retirement is: insufficient return on investment. It's nice that some people like it, but it's too much work for the stress it's given me over the past 5 years."