Are you living in the XXIst century?
First of all, Burning Chrome was published in 1986, and like all the literature from the 80s, it is showing its age. Now, everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, but the only writers that keep writing as they did when they were young are those who only write the same novel, time and time again. So when you say you stopped liking his books in 1993 (Virtual Light), you seem to be looking for something he is no longer interested in writing. Considering that he has always written about the present (Neuromancer being a blend of Reagan, Gates and Reed), maybe you need a different present. Or stop feeling nostalgia.
Your review then is weakened by your particular view of the science fiction genre as a particularly limited continuum, in part because Tom Clancy would disagree with you, in part because William Gibson would also disagree with you (he defines what he has written this century as speculative fiction of the near past), but mainly because you ignore the biggest bulk of what is self referenced as Science Fiction, from Space Opera, with political (Banks, McLeod), military (most ex-military Sci-fi writers) or technological (Egan, Reynolds) bents, to hard close extrapolation (Stross, Cadigan, Williams), and there to escapist science as fantasy, like Harry Harrison. So your comment would be like saying you do not like Tolkien because it is not enough like Howard's Conan, while ignoring almost anything written in the last fifty years.
To be fair, here is my own Spook Country review (four stars of five):
William Gibson always wrote about the present, but now he wants us to really see it.
Although it resembles superficially a standard thriller, this book is much more ambitious. It also tries to showcase some of what is wrong in the USA, while making a serious effort to remain cool, artistic and full of insights on where technology and people will evolve certain applications, from GPS to wireless internet, from hotels to cars.
He has gone back to his often used differing viewpoints, three main characters. In a way, one looks to the past and explains why we are where we are, another looks inside, at why things change, as we change (and is the only character that can really say to evolve), and the last one just sees the outside, plays witness to the plot, the modernity, the tech, while remaining mostly untouched by it all.
As usual with Gibson, it is the secondary characters who really drive the story and get the best literary moments. I hope we meet some of them again, in what is (again) starting to look as a trilogy, paired with his previous novel, Pattern Recognition.
It does not get five stars because two of the main characters do not really fly, despite all the support from the secondary characters, and too much exposition rather than the clipped descriptions he has us used to. It is supposed to be a book to google things about, but instead, at times, he gives us his own google results, breaking the spell.