Well, to tell the truth, on most accounts, he's right- PC gamers are pretty fickle. How many games were cool and innovative, but ended up flopping for one reason or another? Homeworld was not really an overwhelming success- great gameplay, but confusing controls. Black and White- very innovative AI, shamefully non-innovative gameplay. Sacrifice? Excellent game- but no one's playing it... I still can't quite figure out the reason why on that one.
The PC community is well prepared to accept innovation- we spend more money on graphics cards than we spend on the CPU, we overclock and tweak, add memory, all to get the most out of our systems for the next big innovation. However, we know a rip-off when we see it. What good are those expensive graphics cards when the game you play doesn't have graphics? Few gamers I know will pay $10 a month anymore for a primarily text-based game. Heck, I refuse to sign up for any MMRPG's coz I plain old refuse to pay $30 a month for any game.
The line that really offends me is the final quote from McNealy, which essentially compares us to 10 year olds. Right. Like "mommy dearest" he knows what's best for us, so we better pay up and eat our vegetables.