Ad Hominem? He said only one thing about 'Gruber' that he is tired of him. Rest of his comment was about Gruber's arguments and non arguments. I didn't see any Ad Hominem attack in the original comment.
And how is Gruber's overall argument right if he is critical of Apple in two of the four points? How does that even make sense?
>>I used to be a big fan of Gruber, but I'm getting increasingly tired of his "defend Apple at all costs" mentality.
Contains a claim that Gruber's mentality is to defend Apple at all costs. Since Gruber does not do this in the post, it is a false claim.
This claim is used to lend credence to the idea that Gruber is in fact misrepresenting his feelings about Microsoft since the situation presented would force Gruber, with the presumption that he defends Apple at all costs, to say otherwise than what he said he would say. Except that the premise is false.
All of this makes you wonder why OP would single out this point to begin with since it's the least salient to the thrust of the article. This makes OP's point something of a straw man and character attack.
And how is Gruber's overall argument right if he is critical of Apple in two of the four points? How does that even make sense?