Next week at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Spain, Microsoft is likely to unveil Windows Mobile 7, the new version of its mobile operating system, trying to create some excitement around its foundering mobile strategy.

“Foundering” is probably kind, given the innovative strides both Google (GOOG) and Apple (AAPL) have made in the smartphone arena in recent years by comparison.

That’s why rumors about the various attributes of the new mobile OS escalated again after Microsoft (MSFT) CFO Peter Klein noted at the company’s most recent earnings call: “As we have been saying from a product perspective, we are working very hard on the next version of Windows Mobile…we will be talking more about that in Barcelona in a few weeks.”

The most prominent of those rumors is that the new OS morphs into a kind of “ZunePhone,” incorporating functionality from the software of Microsoft’s digital music player.

And as one hand does software, Microsoft has also been doing the smartphone equivalent of a Long March with its “Project Pink,” the long anticipated multimedia touchscreen device that has been in development for a while by its Premium Mobile Experiences group.

That team is apparently hidden away in a Seattle office–as opposed to its nearby Redmond, Wash., HQ–and still includes some employees from Danger, the iconic company that designed the once-popular Sidekick mobile phone and was bought by Microsoft in 2008 for $500 million.

There, both Microsoft-designed hardware and software are being created, with some sort of device to come out this year, sources said, despite persistent rumors that the whole project would be scotched.

The hope–when the tech giant finally does end this very long gestation–is that it can finally get some traction in the increasingly important smartphone space, which is dominated by Apple’s iPhone and, farther behind, phones using Google’s Android operating system.

While Microsoft tirelessly argues that Windows mobile software is on many more phones around the globe than that of competitors, the challenge is clear externally–and internally, if you listen carefully to the griping about the company’s mobile strategy, which one exec there recently admitted to me was an “embarrassment.”

Indeed, this is why Microsoft and its giant wallet might be better served by buying one of the big and more established telecom companies, such as Research in Motion (RIMM), Palm (PALM) or even–as another Microsoft exec said to me, “Why not?”–Nokia (NOK).

Nokia has a market cap of close to $50 billion, with RIM at close to $38 billion. And Palm? A paltry $1.74 billion. Microsoft’s current valuation is $246 billion, and the company has $40 billion in cash and marketable securities on hand.

While the purchase of Danger was pricey given how little it has yielded as yet, to do such a deal would send shock waves throughout the industry and–if it were Nokia or RIM, both of which are non-U.S.-based companies–change the game immediately.

And, in fact, many sources at Microsoft have told me that CEO Steve Ballmer has expressed interest in buying RIM many times (while also dismissing any interest in Palm).

Well, at least, Ballmer is thinking big. And he should, because mobile, which everyone knows is the key platform in the coming era of computing, will be all about getting–as the saying goes–big or getting out.

AOL has taken another step closer to selling off its ICQ instant messaging service, culling seven bids to four “serious” ones, said sources close to the situation.

The price for the service is hovering just under $200 million, several sources said, with one bid higher.

An AOL spokeswoman declined to comment.

BoomTown reported news of the sale of ICQ by AOL (AOL) in November, part of a deleveraging of units from the newly independent Internet company as it focuses more on its content and advertising business.

While other reports a month later said the sale was closer to completion than it actually was, the process is proceeding in a more traditional manner, with bidders making proposals to AOL’s investment bankers, Allen & Co. and Morgan Stanley (MS).

Sources said that the solicitation of bids is now over and that there are four “serious” ones, which one person close to the situation described as a “U.N. of buyers.”

Translation: The bidders are likelier to be international Internet companies rather than from the U.S.

That’s because ICQ–which has 40 to 50 million active users across the globe–has a stronger overseas business, especially in Germany, Russia, Eastern Europe and Israel.

While I could not get the exact names of those left in the running, the most obvious possibilities include:

Russian investment group Digital Sky Technologies, which has invested in both Facebook and social gaming site Zynga; China’s huge Tencent-owned QQ instant messaging and gaming service; Naspers, a multimedia giant known as the MIH Group and based in South Africa; Seznam, the largest Web portal in the Czech Republic; and, perhaps, Yandex, Russia’s leading search engine.

In the U.S., some felt Google (GOOG) would be a bidder for ICQ, though it was Yahoo (YHOO) that apparently made a much lower offer, which took it out of the running.

In any case, the price will likely be much lower than what AOL paid in 1998.

The then-powerful AOL acquired ICQ, which was one of the most explosive online communications tools, for $287 million, with another $120 million in earnouts for the team. It was part of a Tel Aviv, Israel, start-up called Mirabilis.

But ICQ’s popularity in the U.S. lagged compared with rival services from Microsoft (MSFT), Yahoo and Google. In addition, Facebook and Twitter have become major players in the status-update space.

AOL’s AIM service, in contrast, is quite strong, typically clocking in as one of the top instant messaging properties.

ICQ is still based in Israel with about 100 employees and is moderately profitable. Bidders, sources said, are now talking with the ICQ team as part of the process.

The snake finally ate its own tail in the long-running NBC debacle over the network’s mishandling of its late-night switcheroo, with a Super Bowl promotion for David Letterman’s “Late Show” on CBS (CBS) last night.

It starred Letterman, daytime talk show queen Oprah Winfrey and–big reveal–Jay Leno.

The bit was perhaps what will be the final joke in the humor-heavy mess around the cloddish game of musical chairs perpetrated by NBC management on the Viacom (VIA) television network’s late-night stars.

In the end, “Tonight Show” host Conan O’Brien was out, replaced by former “Tonight Show” host Leno, who had previously been replaced by O’Brien and whose own attempt at a show earlier in the evening bombed.

Of all the players, “Late Show” host Letterman has actually gotten the most mileage from the imbroglio, taking an endless number of dead-on shots at Leno, all of which portrayed him as the villain, including a high-pitched impression of him.

That mockery was on display in the short promo below, with the trio on a couch for what Letterman called the “worst Super Bowl party ever.”

It wasn’t.

Enjoy the video, as well as the 2007 promo it was based on with just Letterman and Winfrey.

Here are two quotes that got me thinking about what would happen if Facebook–whose user base is inexorably marching toward 400 million–ever got serious about the news aggregation business.

First, perpetual apple-cart-upsetter Mark Cuban raised everyone’s hackles this week by taking aim at online sites that aggregate news from other sources, especially Google (GOOG).

Among other colorful things Cuban said during a keynote speech:

“Google is a vampire, and you run scared. There is no reason to be indexed in Google….You haven’t gotten anything back except that you’ve turned into zombies….You’ve got to realize they’re vampires and you can’t be the dumb blonde showing your neck.”

Then, yesterday, in a fourth-quarter earnings call, AOL (AOL) CEO Tim Armstrong, answering a question about the renewal status of its search deal with Google, talked about how other outlets, especially Facebook, are now more important than ever to getting traffic for his company’s content.

“Our strategy on distribution is not relying on search,” said Armstrong. “Fragmentation is our friend.”

It was a curious way of putting it, but the message was clear and correct–it will be increasingly obvious that consumers are inevitably moving away from the only-search paradigm to that of discovery through social and other jacked-up affiliation networks.

Of course, this puts a site like Facebook in the catbird seat, given that vast seas of rich data flow through it all the time.

In fact, Facebook is already one of the bigger sources of traffic to media sites, behind just Google, Microsoft (MSFT) and Yahoo (YHOO).

That’s because, at any given moment, Facebook users are trading bazillions of links to articles, blogs, videos, photo images and more, pointing the way to their friends in a giant did-you-see-this mosh pit.

While this is dispersed widely all over the social networking service–on the Wall, on fan pages, in email, in comments–one has to wonder what would happen if Facebook ever decides to start corralling the information with some kind of aggregation method.

Could it pick the most linked and emailed stories of the day? Could it select the most popular photos? Could it tell you accurately what its little slice of humanity was buzzing about on a minute-by-minute basis?

Of course it could, but as more of a new sparkly “Twilight” vampire than the scary old-time one Cuban described.

Not that it will. I once queried Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg about the idea that Facebook could make some sort of newfangled competitor to the still-powerful Yahoo News.

No, she replied pretty flatly, noting that the whole service was already about people sharing all kinds of news and information with their friends.

But, it is clear to me, that–much as Google moved into the automated new business–Facebook could do the same anytime it wants to and create what would probably be one of the top aggregation sites for any topic on the Web.

The Silicon Valley phenom certainly could not be as easily de-indexed as Google by worried media companies, because the skeins of information are so enmeshed that separating them is impossible. And why would you?

In his speech, Cuban urged traditional media creators to stop the aggregation madness.

“Show some balls,” he said. “If you turn your neck to a vampire, they are [going to] bite. But at some point the vampires run out of people’s blood to suck.”

In a deeply socially connected world though, it’s a very different story. And in that world, vampires really do live forever.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

Earlier this week, the reliably erudite PBS public affairs program, “Frontline,” aired a documentary called “Digital Nation,” which I caught on television in one of the rare moments I find myself actually in front of one.

Produced by Rachel Dretzin, in collaboration with tech author and pundit Douglas Rushkoff, it’s the second in a series–the first, which aired in 2008, was titled “Growing Up Online”–about how the inevitable digital onslaught is affecting everyone.

As the site for the show describes itself, in part:

Over a single generation, the Web and digital media have remade nearly every aspect of modern culture, transforming the way we work, learn and connect in ways that we’re only beginning to understand…Dretzin and her team report from the front lines of digital culture–from love affairs blossoming in virtual worlds, to the thoroughly wired classrooms of the future, to military bases where the Air Force is fighting a new form of digital warfare. Along the way, they begin to map the critical ways that technology is transforming us–and what we may be learning about ourselves in the process.

And, indeed, Dretzin and her team race hither and yon interviewing a pile of smart folks–most of whom, thankfully, are not from Silicon Valley–to uncover what’s up with this Internet thing, which the kids seem to love.

There are ruminations on the out-of-focus students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the evils of multitasking, fretting over how this digital submersion is affecting the brains of schoolchildren and more jaw-dropping over the creepily compelling oddness of virtual worlds and online relationships.

Dretzin even features and–natch!–clucks over her own computer-savvy children and what it all means to them. She plays the role of the less-plugged-in mother, complete with a furrowed brow about it all, although the kids are obviously sharp as tacks, digital French flashcards or not.

This egads-no-one-know-where-this-geekery-is-taking-us worrywartness is probably appropriate, and though nothing new, is well told.

Perhaps the best part is a visit to the spanking new gaming-heavy center the Army has built that sucks in teen boys like nobody’s business.

While the piece has aired, you still can watch the whole thing on the well done Digital Nation Web site, the best part of which is the contributions of regular people who added their own voices to the digital conversation.

Which is remarkably robust, as far as I can tell, so perhaps we have not gone to hell in a cloud-computing handbasket quite yet.

Here are two of the more adorkable of those videos:

Here is the whole “Digital Nation” doc, in nine chapters:

Distracted by Everything

What’s It Doing to Their Brains

South Korea’s Gaming Craze

Teaching With Technology

The Dumbest Generation?

Relationships

Virtual Worlds

Can Virtual Experiences Change Us?

Where Are We Headed?

Here is a terrific video by singer Caitlin Crosby, which seems to start as a marketing tool for her most recent album and single, “Flawz.”

Instead, her rallying cry of “Embrace Your Flawz,” aimed at a wide range of people, especially young girls, makes for a most effective and innovative online message, made up of messages from fans and celebrities.

You can also visit the Love Your Flawz Web site, but here is the video:

If you feel the need to dig deep into AOL’s business, as outlined today by its fourth-quarter earnings results, here is the full skinny, including its official press release, financial slides and something called a trending schedule.

Please feel free to wallow in the data or enjoy BoomTown’s take on the AOL (AOL) earnings call here.

You can also listen in on the whole conference call here on the AOL investor relations page.

Request-AOL-2 –

Request-AOL –

Request-AOL-1 –

BoomTown liveblogged the AOL conference call, the first since it spun off from Time Warner (TWX).

And essentially, it was all about turning the Internet icon around. Bottom line: Still turning, but the lid is super-duper tight, folks!

Earlier this morning, AOL (AOL) reported its fourth-quarter results, which beat very, very low Wall Street expectations.

As MediaMemo reported:

After factoring out one-time charges, AOL posted earnings of 71 cents per share on revenue of $810 million. Wall Street expected earnings of either 62 cents or 66 cents per share, depending on who you ask, on revenue of around $766 million.

And while advertising revenue was lousy, it wasn’t as bad as Wall Street had expected–it dropped eight percent, and analysts had assumed it would show a double-digit decline. Subscription revenue, which still drives the company, though, dropped more quickly than analysts assumed, down 28 percent.

5:39 am PT: I jumped on the call a few minutes late, since AOL’s fancy system for listening to the call using a Webcast would not play in Apple’s (AAPL) Safari browser. Or else I am an idiot.

In any case, Firefox worked and we pressed on!

When I finally got on the call, it was perfect timing, since CFO Arthur Minson was delivering the results in a deeply glum manner, but with a very nice New York accent. It could have also been a Boston accent.

It was definitely a glum accent! “To be clear,” said Minson, AOL’s model “was not working.”

Well, it was nice to hear the obvious!

Minson continued to smack AOL around for quite a bit, which is a good strategy–to drop expectations in order to raise the company’s prospects with Wall Street later.

But the team led by CEO Tim Armstrong was on it! It has cut employees and other costs! It has decided to dump businesses that aren’t working! It has even cutting coupons, metaphorically speaking! This was serious beeswax, people!

5:52 am: Armstrong came back to answer questions from the analysts gathered.

He’s all about the content and how it will bring in the audience to sell advertising to.

The next question: Others have tried this niche content strategy and failed. Why was Armstrong different? Also, can AOL control its search destiny?

Armstrong begged to differ on calling AOL’s content strategies “niche.” Engadget is HUGE!

“It’s a scale that…advertisers find very attractive,” he said. “It works for consumers, it works for advertisers.”

As to search engine ranking? Search is not the only game in town, said the man who made his fortune as an exec at search giant Google (GOOG).

There are other fish in the sea, said Armstrong, such as Facebook and Twitter. “Our strategy on distribution is not relying on search,” he added. “Fragmentation is our friend.”

The next question: How’s AOL on display advertising compared with others?

What else was he going to say? Great, natch! Lots of low-hanging fruit (whatever that means!).

“Advertisers tend to vote where momentum is,” said Armstrong. “AOL is the company people are used to kicking around.”

No longer! The 98-pound weakling is now 99 pounds!

6:08 am: Another question on how AOL is improving itself. No more obsession with page views! No more tricks, like too many slideshows.

“As a net takeaway, the company is getting healthier, although you may see bumps,” said Armstrong.

It sounds painful!

More questions about fixing what’s broke.

And then, finally, a different one on what AOL is going to do around products and what it is planning on acquiring to help it do so, as well as what’s up with its search deal, which is up for renewal soon.

“We’re bringing product mentality back into the company,” said Armstrong, continuing to bash the previous administration about its overspending and lack of innovation.

Apparently, AOL is also done with “Hail Mary” acquisitions.

As to the search deal, Armstrong said AOL likes Google, but it is not making any commitments!

Also: “If you’re looking at this deal to squeeze out extra pennies,” look elsewhere, said Armstrong, who uses the word “partner,” which could also translate to “Microsoft” (MSFT).

What about making capital expenditures? We’re comfortable, said Minson. And no more short-term thinking!

More bashing of the past, which was getting a little tiresome.

6:22 am: What about divestitures?

Minson noted that he could not comment, but took a long time doing so.

A question about brand advertising and whether it is in good shape.

Yes, said Armstrong, but what else was he going to say again, since AOL sells brand advertising?

Last question: What is the key driver of margins at AOL going forward? As in: What the heck is going to get this baby humming and not sputtering?

“I think it comes down to user engagement,” said Armstrong about brand advertising.

To wrap up, after a decade of quiet, concluded Armstrong, who also underscored that the management team is more interested in execution than pleasing investors: “We’re live.”

Apparently, reports of AOL’s death are greatly exaggerated.

UPDATE: I got to chat with Armstrong for a bit after the call and he reiterated his essential talking points, including the need for execution, the importance of running AOL for the long term, and how he thinks Wall Street has patience for the company.

“AOL had a premise of making decisions for next week,” he said. “We are now stringently focused on the user.”

Obviously, Armstrong added, there will be focus on expanding AOL’s ad business. “That expansion is strong and continuing,” he said.

But there were no in-place strictures he called “guardrails.” And anything not in the guardrails? Off the road!

As to investor patience? “My guess is that we have multiple years,” said Armstrong.

It will be like they never left the Googleplex in Silicon Valley if this Washington, D.C., invasion of execs from the search giant keeps up.

The fourth new geek in town is Sumit Agarwal (pictured here), who was head of Google’s mobile product management and has become the deputy assistant secretary of defense for outreach and social media in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense.

Phew! But what’s that? Poking with M-16s? The Berlin Wall? Tweeting troop movements?

In any case, it’s interesting to see so many key appointments in the tech arena going to one company, especially one so immersed now in national and international policy issues.

And especially since Google (GOOG) has begun spending so much money in D.C. on lobbying.

As I reported recently:

According to the most recent public reports filed by Google with the Senate on its lobbying spending there, the search giant has significantly increased its outlay in 2009 from the previous two years.

In 2007, Google spent a total of $1.52 million, which rose to $2.84 million in 2008.

And the 2009 total? Just over $4 million, according to the Lobbying Disclosure Act Database.

That’s probably no surprise given the ever-growing range of issues of concern to U.S. regulators due to Google’s increasing number of deals and because of many new and often controversial initiatives the company is forging forward with.

From pushing for approval of its DoubleClick acquisition in 2007 to its failed attempt to strike a search and online partnership with Yahoo (YHOO) in 2008 to last year’s wrangling with book publishers to 2010’s expected tussle over its $750 million purchase of mobile advertising start-up AdMob, Google’s presence in D.C. is only going to rise as its ambitions expand.

That’s still $2.7 million less than archrival Microsoft (MSFT) spent in 2009, but Google has been gaining on the software giant in a very short time.

In any case, these are former Googlers, who might or might not return to the mother ship at the end of their tenure.

But, for those keeping track, Agarwal will join:

* Former business development and product exec Katie Jacobs Stanton, who was the Obama administration’s director of citizen participation and now works in the State Department.

* Google’s top policy wonk, Andrew McLaughlin, who serves as deputy chief technology officer.

* And Sonal Shah, who worked at Google.org and is now director of the White House’s new Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation.

Yammer, the enterprise equivalent of Twitter, said it had grabbed another $10 million in financing.

But the question for the San Francisco-based microblogging service for businesses and closed groups is: “What are you working on?”

Yammer has both free and a paid–the gold level is $5 per user, per month–versions and is essentially a useful productivity tool.

Emergence Capital took the lead in the Series B round for Yammer, along with ubiquitous Silicon Valley investor Ron Conway and previous investors.

Yammer previously raised $5 million from Charles River Ventures and The Founders Fund.

Here’s the release:

Yammer Secures $10 Million in Series B Funding from Emergence Capital and Previous Investors

Investment To Fuel Product Innovation and Sales Coverage

SAN FRANCISCO, Calif., February 3, 2010–Yammer, Inc., the leader in Enterprise Microblogging and Real-time Communications, today announced that it has received $10 million in its Series B round of funding. Emergence Capital leads the round; with general partner Jason Green joining Yammer’s Board of Directors. SV Angel, led by seasoned Silicon Valley investor, Ron Conway, is also participating as are previous investors, including Charles River Ventures and Goldcrest Investments from Dallas.

Yammer launched its solution in September 2008 and has experienced rapid user adoption with over 60,000 organizations globally having adopted the solution. Drawing on this momentum, Yammer will use the proceeds to accelerate product innovation and increase sales coverage.

“Yammer is revolutionizing the way employees communicate and collaborate, filling a need that email has failed to deliver,” said Jason Green, general partner at Emergence Capital. “Yammer has a passionate and proven executive team, a compelling freemium business model, a loyal customer base and a huge market opportunity. We are thrilled to be joining them in the next phase of their rapid growth.”

Companies and organizations of all sizes across a wide range of industries benefit from Yammer. They use Yammer for a multitude of reasons, including improving workforce productivity, connecting a geographically dispersed team, getting new employees up to speed, and increasing the flow of content and knowledge.

“Yammer is focused on improving the way employees communicate and stay connected to critical information about their company and job,” said David Sacks, founder and CEO at Yammer. “We’re pleased with the rapid growth and market adoption we’ve achieved and are poised to accelerate it with exciting enhancements to our product and with broadened sales coverage. We’re eager to work with Emergence Capital and leverage their expertise in building world-class Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) companies and are gratified that proven technology investors such as SV Angel and Charles River Ventures are also participating in the funding.”

Every year on Groundhog Day, my friends–such as Liz and Treby, from when I was but a wee BoomTown (well, I am still wee)–call me with holiday greetings.

Why? Because freakish child that I was, I actually threw an annual Groundhog Day fest at school, complete with a cake–I used a rabbit-shaped pan, cut off its ears and added slivered almonds as teeth.

My premise: There was no good holiday between Christmas/New Year’s and Easter. Also groundhogs were deeply misunderstood.

So, as I take off to bake another cake with the kids–passing on a noble tradition–here are some videos to enjoy.

By the way, groundhog No. 1, Punxsutawney Phil, did see his shadow, so winter continues!

Super Bowl ad featuring Troy Polamalu as Punxsutawney Phil:

Cat vs. Groundhog:

Tiger Woods vs. “Caddyshack” gopher (which kind of looks like a groundhog–see differences here):

The inevitable Best Scenes from the most excellent “Groundhog Day” movie:

Groundhog Day 2010 in Punxsutawney, Pa. (with the dude who played Ned Ryerson in “Groundhog Day,” who does a weird whistling bellybutton thing!!!):

Longtime Silicon Valley exec Dan Rosensweig (pictured here) is stepping down as CEO and president of the Guitar Hero division of Activision Blizzard to take a new job as president and CEO of Chegg, the top online textbook rental start-up.

Both companies confirmed the move, which is somewhat unexpected given that the former Yahoo (YHOO) COO landed the job running the top gaming franchise in March of last year.

It has been an eventful, but also a particularly tough year at Guitar Hero, in the face of yet another withering downturn in the gaming market.

While Activision (ATVI) introduced a new version of its flagship Guitar Hero game, as well as a new DJ Hero, Band Hero and a Guitar Hero: Van Halen version, sales were weaker overall, even though DJ Hero was the the No. 1 new game in both the U.S. and Europe.

Nonetheless, according to a recent report from research firm NPD Group, sales in the videogame space were down eight percent in 2009 from 2008.

And while Guitar Hero did gain market share as the most popular such game in its genre, most expect its trajectory to be downward.

Guitar Hero 5 sold slightly fewer than 996,000 units from September through December in North America, for example, according to NPD.

While global sales were better, Guitar Hero: World Tour, in comparison, sold 3.4 million units the year earlier.

In contrast, Rosensweig–who is probably much more suited to the pure Web space and the Silicon Valley scene–will be taking over a much faster-growing business at Chegg, based in Santa Clara, Calif.

It has become the front-runner in the increasingly competitive online textbook rental space.

To help maintain that lead, Chegg has garnered a huge $144 million investment kitty.

Top venture firms, such as Kleiner Perkins, Foundation Capital and, most recently, Insight Venture Partners, have presumably handed over that money to co-founders Osman Rashid and Aayush Phumbhra in hopes of big returns.

The pair started Chegg in 2005 at Iowa State University as a classified rental service, where books were the dominant item, but evolved its business to focus on actually doing the textbook rentals.

The company’s unusual name, Chegg, is a mashup of chicken and egg and its model is similar to that of innovative video rental outfit Netflix (NFLX).

Chegg now serves close to 7,000 schools across the U.S. and has a cute and student-friendly practice of planting a tree for every textbook rented, bought or sold.

With 120 employees in Silicon Valley and more at a warehouse operation in Louisville, Ky., Chegg claims it has grown over 600 percent year over year since its founding, although the start-up would not provide more specifics on financials.

A spokeswoman said that company rented more books in January of this year than all of last year and has saved students more than $137 million.

Typically, a rental costs a fraction of what buying a book outright does. It is ordered online and then sent to a renter, who then returns it.

All this activity has attracted a lot of interest from both big and small players, especially given the $10 billion college textbook business.

While one can assume that a lot of Chegg’s business will eventually move to digital downloads, especially as the use of e-readers explodes, the physical business is strong for the near term.

The Barnes & Noble (BKS) College division recently began testing a textbook rental program, for example, and is rolling it out to 25 U.S. colleges. And BookRenter is a smaller competitor.

But with Chegg, Rosensweig is getting to ride the lead horse in the space, taking over from current CEO Rashid.

In an interview a year ago, in fact, Rashid said, “I do not want to be a long-term CEO. My passion is solving the problem and getting the company to a place where it can be taken to the next step.”

While he will remain chairman, the entrepreneur has recently closed $7.5 million in funding for a new stealth start-up called Kakai. Sources have said it is focused on the even more crowded e-reader space.

The replacement for Rosensweig–who had been working in private equity since his departure from Yahoo (YHOO) in late 2006 and has also worked at CNET Networks and Ziff-Davis–will be the Guitar Hero division’s current COO, David Haddad.

Until he has something to say about Chegg, here is a video interview I did with Rosensweig in September, when the new version of GH5, as well as Band Hero and DJ Hero, were launching: