Stutz did work for Microsoft after all, and I'm sure he experienced his share of bruising from the "Libre" community at the helm of Visual Basic. He is also speaking directly to Microsoft and he wants them to listen, so I'm not surprised he doesn't exactly pledge allegiance to the GPL and indiscriminately bash their own offerings.
You sound principled, and on that I am entirely with you, but I think you're taking his jabs too personally. The open source community is not *entirely* comprised of enlightened and heroic developers: some really do just want the money or prestige even as they dodge the requisite responsibilities. Divergence can become a bad thing when it leads to ugly and unfair competitive practices, which we've seen from many vendors in the software industry, not just Microsoft (although they're truly ugliest when employed by the king of the hill).
I also think Microsoft should be given the opportunity to change and repent. It may be as likely as Dick Cheney joining Greenpeace, but necessity comes from many angles. It's important to note that free and open software pre-dates the Microsoft monopoly. By creating backlash, Bill & Co. may have contributed to the momentum, but the open source revolution now clearly cannot and will not be extinguished. The amazing thing is, that's Stutz's primary point, too.
As a related aside, I absolutely cannot believe how many people are out there running Tomcat with IIS. Is there no threshold for pain anymore?