I'm intrigued by the idea that the board might support Ballmer's reorganization plan but think that someone else might be best to implement it. Generally speaking, when a CEO retires prematurely, it's because the board wants a different direction. If they wanted to continue in the same direction, they would have kept the old guy.
People who want Gates to step aside as activist chairman are right. He's just not in touch with the industry anymore. The work Gates is doing is important and admirable, but doesn't keep him involved in technology.