Anil talks about how the agreements between Microsoft / SUN and the merger between HP/Compaq all came to fruition because women were the catalysts.

Going back to how it got started, let me tell you about the Easter invitation. Before Scott [McNealy] called for golf, Scott's wife invited my wife over for Easter. My wife doesn't know Scott's wife. There are two families that are good friends of the Ballmers and good friends of the McNealys—they happened to be with the McNealys in Palm Springs [Calif.], and they thought I was going to be there with my wife and kids. It turned out we were going someplace else for Easter. But Scott's wife checked with Scott. At the time, I guess he was sort of thinking about this in a preliminary way.

So, just as the technology industry's largest and most successful company merger ever was led by a woman, the cessation of a decades-long rivalry that resulted in some of the least productive and most useless bickering in the technology business was instigated by two women, neither of whom (as far as I know) are even on the payroll of their husband's companies.

A lot of people wonder why I harp on the importance of solving the underrepresentation of women in the technology industry, or why I am glad to work in an environment that's evenly balanced between genders, and I think the fact that two women who aren't even the CEOs of Microsoft and Sun could generate so much value for the industry illustrates the point rather well.

This is ludicrous.  I don't see how this illustrates the point at all…Second…what is the point Anil?

I am a long time reader of Anils blog and respect his contributions to the community, but to draw a line to the HP / Compaq deal and suggest that this Easter coincidence with McNealys and Balmers wives is anything more then anecdotal to the story is a joke.  Whether this is intentional or not, placing it in the piece as he does, does this in my opinion.  Further, it disrespects the teams that were involved in the year long resolution of the disputes and portrays Balmers / McNealys wives to be mere "housewives" who have nothing better to do then to arrange social engagements for their families when in fact they are heavily engaged in philanthropic activities.  It just has to much of that 60's Better Homes and Gardens feel to it.  Then, to further infer that having a balanced workforce is a good thing because women are more capable at solving complex and long standing (a la HP/Compaq) adversarial relationships because they are female, is a absurd.

Maybe his entry was written in a light hearted way, but it confuses me and I have to say that this position frustrates the hell out me because it sounds a bit to much like the beginning of an arguement for affirmative action would.  Don't even get me started on that.

I think that most of us can agree that we must put the past in the past, recognize where our society has failed us and move forward by building a FULLY INCLUSIVE workforce based on merit and MERIT alone.  To accept anything less would should be appalling to all of us, not to mention illegal.