I'll again ask the counter-question: what do you want your surround processor to do with a network connection? There are several possibilities, of course.

Do you want it for firmware updates? Personally, I'd rather see a USB port that can pull firmware updates off a USB stick than an ethernet port that downloads updates over the Internet. It's got to be cheaper, which means less cost for consumers, and it doesn't get into the question of how to establish a connection (which could involve investing in a wireless bridge or a long cable run if it's the only network-equipped device in the rack). That's become my favorite way for updating firmware on disc players. Failing that, the 990's USB-to-PC approach with a more streamlined software interface would work for me.

Do you want an ethernet port so it can be a media client? This is the most common reason for the request, but I've owned a couple such devices now and I still think integrating something like that into a processor is most likely to be disappointing. To avoid incurring significant extra cost, it'd likely result in a marginal product (something very basic that is not likely to satisfy the people most interested in seeing it included). It'd be potentially straightforward to add audio support without much significant extra hardware or software, for example, but adding support for video formats would entail including some likely significant hardware and firmware that would otherwise not be required. Why pack all that into a surround processor when you could put it in a separate chassis?