This is almost a good article.
He raises some very good points including how Macs, Iphone and iPads are categorized, and I think he certainly can make an argument that the categorization that was chosen by the IDCs and Gartners of this world perhaps didn't help Apple.
I also certainly agree that IDC and Gartner et al. very much try to influence the market. In a prior role, I used to routinely have IDC and Gartner among others come in to talk at large customer events and they would ask us what they wanted us to say and would present only data that backed up what we requested. Basically, you can buy any of these companies. These firms have a long history of doing this, well before smartphones and tablets were a twinkling in Jobs' eye. That being said, I don't believe any of these companies have an intrinsic Apple bias, on the contrary, I find some of their projections to be very rosy for Apple.
However, as usual, I'm afraid, the bias in this articles ruins it. Some of the assertions are ridiculous, such as:
"Over the past year, the failure of Android tablets from Amazon, Samsung, Asus, LG, Microsoft and Google/Motorola to live up their sales predictions (or have any substantial impact on the iPad at all) has demanded a new tactic in the anti-counting of Apple's iPad."
I agree with the author that the 'white label' tablets should be singled out, but in the latest 3Q tablet data from IDC, you'll see Samsung growing 123% to 9.7 million units and Lenovo growing 421% to 2.3 million units. This compares to Apple's growth of 0.6% to 14.1 million units. Apple will of course do much better in 4Q, but the claims that this is having no substantial impact on Apple is not backed up by the evidence. The fact that Apple came out with an 8" device responding directly to a (correctly perceived) threat from these very competitors is evidence that even Apple wouldn't agree with the author.
Edited by JamesMac - 11/17/13 at 3:54pm