Fortune magazine–which never met a list it did not like to make–had a solid group of women tech types on its “50 Most Powerful Women 2009” roster, the annual survey it posted yesterday.

Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz made the Top Ten this year, clocking in at No. 8.

Other women geek types–many from Silicon Valley–on the list include:

Ursula Burns, CEO of Xerox (XRX) at No. 9; IBM (IBM) Global Sales and Distribution SVP Ginni Rometty at No. 11; Oracle (ORCL) President Safra Catz at No. 12; Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) Technology Solutions Group EVP Ann Livermore at No. 13; Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg at No. 22; Charlene Begley, president and CEO, GE (GE) Enterprise Solutions at No. 27; Lorrie Norrington, president of eBay (EBAY) Marketplaces at No. 40; HP CFO Cathie Lesjack at No. 42; and, finally, Google (GOOG) Search Products and User Experience VP Marissa Mayer at No. 44.

The conference associated with the Fortune issue, spearheaded by Pattie Sellers, will take place next week, starting Monday, in Carlsbad, Calif.

Fortune is part of Time Inc., which is owned by Time Warner (TWX).

Bartz, Sandberg and others will be interviewed onstage, along with Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) chairman and CEO Warren Buffett.

Will BoomTown be in attendance, with my trusty Flip digital video at the ready? Yes, indeedy, so the lady geeks should beware–and I am talking to you, Sandberg!

Until then, here’s a cable television interview Bartz did today on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” Clocking in at almost 12 minutes, it’s classic Carol, with sassy catchphrases and jokes about being a really tough lady, but with little new news–except for her saying she would have sold to Microsoft (MSFT) when it was offering $33 a share way back when, because she is not “stupid.”

Indeed not.

Here’s the video:

Here come more tech earnings this week, as investors hope the industry can help goose a still shaky economy.

But while the tech industry is healthy, relatively speaking, they probably should not hope too hard to be soaring anytime soon on Silicon Valley’s digital flying carpet.

Last week, Intel (INTC) and Nokia (NOK) both turned in not-so-pretty performances, due to the econalypse, although management was hoping for better days ahead.

Google (GOOG), as it is wont to do, surprised Wall Street with its surprise profit performance, although its sales juggernaut was showing some serious signs of wheezing.

But that was so last week.

IBM (IBM) is first out of the gate today, with analysts expecting a slight earnings increase on declining revenue from a year ago. As long as the tech giant reports a “meh” and not an “ugh,” all will be right here.

Yahoo (YHOO), on the other hand, will get a much closer look-see tomorrow, as most are guessing that its online advertising business has been hard hit and that its previous cost-cutting has not yet made enough of a difference.

In fact, no one is expecting much at all from Yahoo, other than a huge dropoff–almost 30 percent–in profits and a large one–just over 10 percent–in revenues. Ouch!

Most of the questions about Yahoo will likely focus will be on three things:

1.) Whether Yahoo will make an announcement about additional cost cuts, specifically, more layoffs.

2.) Whether CEO Carol Bartz will answer any questions about discussions with Microsoft about search and ad partnership discussions.

3.) What folksy or ribald phrase Bartz will use to describe Yahoo’s current state. Her last one using attack chickens was most excellent.

Apple (AAPL) will report Wednesday and it will likely be all about the iPhone, the exploding apps ecosystem and whether the company can keep on selling its computers in a down economy.

One wonders if someone will ask for a reaction about those new Microsoft commercials, which loudly pointing out how much pricier Apple products are.

Earnings are expected to decline slightly with revenues up slightly.

And, of course, the health of Apple leader Steve Jobs, who is on leave, will also be top of mind on the call, although it is unlikely that the company will comment, as usual.

Lastly, this week, Microsoft (MSFT) will also weigh in on Thursday, with everyone wondering how its powerful main software business is doing, as well as how its less-than-powerful online business is faring.

Also critical will be the company’s outlook on the upcoming rollouts of its redone search service and its Windows 7 launch.

Both earnings and revenue are expected to be down slightly for Microsoft.

But, in this quarter at least, down slightly is the new up.

BoomTown is not going to go all servers and Solaris on you, as I am leaving the complicated details of the collapsed IBM (IBM) bid for Sun Microsystems (JAVA) to Digital Daily’s John Paczkowski to sort out.

But perhaps the best headline and first sentence of the plethora of stories about the $7 billion buyout debacle, which seems sure to get horribly messy now, is from Andy Greenberg of Forbes.com:

The headline: “Sun May Be Pulling A Yahoo!”

And lede: “Sun Microsystems is facing its Jerry Yang moment.”

I wonder if every failed tech merger with a squabblefest and a board in chaos will now be accused of blowing it, as most think the Yahoo (YHOO) co-founder and former CEO Yang did in rejecting the $41 billion offer from Microsoft (MSFT).

In an interesting aside, speaking of the chaotic Sun board, one of its members is none other than Peter Currie.

Currie (pictured here) just inherited another potential mess over at Facebook, when he agreed to step in to take over as a financial adviser to the social-networking site, which abruptly replaced CFO Gideon Yu last week.

Sounds like Currie, the former Netscape CFO and investor–who knows from unnatural disaster from his long years in Silicon Valley–has his hands full now.

About three weeks ago, BoomTown surmised that the they’re-practically-giving-them-away prices for some prime but distressed tech companies–combined with cash hordes by stronger players–would eventually result in some acquisition activity sooner than later.

One combination I flagged most prominently, based on several sources, was that IBM would try to grab Sun Microsystems.

And today, The Wall Street Journal reported that that was indeed the case. Talks, the story said, were talking place, with a price of about $6.5 billion as a possibility, a 100 percent premium to Sun’s current market valuation.

We’re not so sure IBM will pay that much in this market, but it’s a good idea for the pair.

Such a deal has been long rumored in Silicon Valley, so I wasn’t the first to suggest such an obvious move, and these talks come as a surprise to very few, which would rescue the long-declining Sun and give heft to IBM’s Internet aims.

In fact, on Feb. 26, I wrote:

“IBM Buys Sun:

I mean someone has to buy Sun Microsystems (JAVA)–now hovering in the $5 a share range with a market valuation of just $3.62 billon–right?

But it’s not going to be Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), despite a deal announced just yesterday in which HP will distribute and provide support for Sun’s Solaris operating system on a line of HP servers.

Analysts dismissed the deal as meaningless in terms of true revenue, with one noting that it did not mean HP would buy Sun either, especially for its server business, because of redundant hardware products.

That leaves, according to many observers I spoke to: IBM (IBM), which competes with Sun in the server business too. Many think the products fit better together and IBM has a $115.3 billion valuation, so the purchase would be doable.

The server business is sucking wind, according to a report earlier this week, due to the global economy, so finding safe harbor for Sun is something Wall Street seems to be looking for.

Of course, Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz curiously did use the term ‘Live Free or Die’ in his blog post about the HP deal yesterday–although he was not referring to Sun’s independence, but noting the phrase was ’synonymous with software independence, innovation and intellectual property freedom.’”

I guess for Sun, freedom’s just another word for something left to sell.

The other deal I mentioned as a major possibility is also commonly bandied about in Silicon Valley and is considered to be just a matter of time and price: Google (GOOG) buying hot microblogging service Twitter.

Let the let’s-make-a-deal activity begin!

About 10 days ago, BoomTown posted a piece titled, “With a King’s Ransom in Cash, Why Is There Still No Buying Spree in the Tech Space Yet?”

Noting the big cash hordes being held by a plethora of giant tech and Internet companies and their strong cash flows too, even in the midst of the economic meltdown–I wondered when the mergers and acquisitions would ever begin.

The answer is two-fold: No one wants to buy when prices could just keep going down. And no one wants to sell at all-time lows.

Another issue? While public companies have a market value, as low as they might be, noted a prominent Internet player, the bulk of tasty private ones no longer have a set price, since there have been no sales of late.

Well, that just won’t do! So, in the interest of jump-starting the economy–I mean, there are investment bankers out there running low on caviar and Dom, folks!–here are three suggestions for interesting deals.

IBM Buys Sun:

I mean someone has to buy Sun Microsystems (JAVA)–now hovering in the $5-a-share range with a market valuation of just $3.62 billon–right?

But it’s not going to be Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), despite a deal announced just yesterday in which HP will distribute and provide support for Sun’s Solaris operating system on a line of HP servers.

Analysts dismissed the deal as meaningless in terms of true revenue, with one noting that it did not mean HP would buy Sun either, especially for its server business, because of redundant hardware products.

That leaves, according to many observers I spoke to: IBM (IBM), which competes with Sun in the server business too. Many think the products fit better together, and IBM has a $115.3 billion valuation, so the purchase would be doable.

The server business is sucking wind, according to a report earlier this week, due to the global economy, so finding safe harbor for Sun is something Wall Street seems to be looking for.

Of course, Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz curiously did use the term “Live Free or Die” in his blog post about the HP deal yesterday–although he was not referring to Sun’s independence, but noting that the phrase was “synonymous with software independence, innovation and intellectual property freedom.”

Google Buys Twitter:

A lot has been written about the supposed “threat” of Twitter to all Web, media and communication companies in the known universe. (How we are all scared by a start-up whose name is so flighty is a question for another day.)

I am not so much convinced, although Twitter certainly is on a roll from a hype and growth perspective.

And I do understand why Twitter–flush with venture funding and an allegedly low burn rate–might want to bide its time to see what happens and not sell out too early.

But while the hot microblogging service declined to sell to Facebook, it might want to reconsider if Google (GOOG) or Microsoft (MSFT) or a big telecom company comes calling with, say, a $1 billion check.

Why? Simply because Twitter–while it says it is poised on the verge of announcing its grand plan to make money–is operating in an arena I have seen many other shooting stars in, traversing a very dangerous crevasse of hype and expectation.

Due to that, it has a very big red target on its back, one that a competitor in the status space–such as the spurned Facebook, whose update business is much bigger–will not ignore.

Right now, Twitter could ask for a lot, as one of the only Web 2.0 companies that everyone is uniformly excited about.

It might want to think about how such excitement can turn rather quickly. Digg–which was almost bought by Google–might give them some advice on how quickly the winds change, for example, as can many too many others.

Microsoft Buys Anyone:

With its $20.7 billion in cash and still casting about for a really bold Internet strategy–sources tell me that newly installed digital head Qi Lu just wrapped up a meeting-rich look-see at the path ahead, including a day-long session on Super Bowl Sunday–Microsoft really should stop futzing around with the PowerPoints and jump right in.

It already has an investment in Facebook. While the social-networking phenom might not be for sale, one wonders if a $10 billion offer and a promise of autonomy might not be well-considered at Facebook’s Palo Alto HQ.

Or what about the social-networking/communication assets of AOL and its low-margin advertising business, with owner Time Warner (TWX) keeping the media part of the unit? Rival Google actually wants to keep that AOL search business, so sticking it to that company would be an added bonus.

As to the continual flirting with Yahoo (YHOO), it is getting to be as annoying as Chuck Bass and Blair Waldorf’s persistently unconsummated roundelay on “Gossip Girl.”

But, of course, once again this week, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said he was interested (sort of, but not), while Yahoo’s CFO Blake Jorgensen said Yahoo was too (sort of, but not).

Said Ballmer at a strategy gathering: “They have share. We don’t have share. They have a huge team. We’ve got a much smaller team….I’m hoping that’s a reasonable conversation to have with new management at Yahoo.”

Said Jorgensen at an investor’s conference: “We’re not opposed to doing a deal…[but] it’s extremely difficult to draw a line down the middle of the organization and split it into two pieces.”

Aaaaaagghhhh!

Dear Steve: Yahoo is the only way Microsoft is ever going to gain the share it so covets, and it looks like new CEO Carol Bartz is at least showing that Yahoo does not have to be roadkill.

Dear Carol: Get while the getting is good because 20 percent is still pretty weak, compared to Google’s 70 percent, and competition is only going to get pricier.

And even though Ballmer could not resist and made a jibe at former CEO Jerry Yang–with whom he famously tangled in the botched acquisition attempts–noting “I don’t want to be known as the Jerry Yang of this market,” everyone knows these two crazy kids belong together.

So kiss, please, declare your undying affection and intent to stick it to Google, and pronto, so we can all move onto the next episode.

Over the next two weeks, tech companies will be reporting their fourth-quarter earnings and the expectations are pretty much what you might imagine: Bad to very bad to very, very bad.

That’s bad, of course, because tech has been one of the bright spots in the U.S. economy, with strong returns quarter after quarter for a long time now.

But the economic meltdown–which began in the financial sector–has infected everything, including digital companies that have heretofore been healthy and strong.

IBM (IBM) kicks off today at 1:30 pm PST with its fourth-quarter results.

Then tomorrow, it’s eBay (EBAY) and Apple (AAPL) on deck.

Obviously, Apple will be of great interest because of what its execs will say about CEO Steve Jobs, who recently announced he was taking a medical leave due to ongoing health issues.

As to eBay, many believe the online auction site will report its first quarterly revenue decline in nearly 10 years.

Then Thursday come the two archrival powerhouses, Google (GOOG) and Microsoft (MSFT), which are both expected to look a little less powerful.

Both are bellwethers, with analysts expecting weaker results, even though they will both probably have the sunniest stories in the very cloudy outlook.

Yahoo (YHOO) is another story next week, when new CEO Carol Bartz will get the privilege of delivering what most expect to be a very weak performance. Some analysts are estimating that Yahoo’s results could scrape the bottom of a very well-scraped barrel.

Let’s hope, in Yahoo’s case and for others, that it is always darkest before the dawn.

BoomTown strives to bring readers the very best in internal memo decoding, and this one is just too good to pass up.

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer sent a short memo to employees this afternoon about finally hiring someone to head the software giant’s lackluster digital efforts.

That someone, as this column reported earlier today before the official announcement, was former Yahoo (YHOO) tech star Qi Lu. He will become president of the Online Services Group at Microsoft (MSFT), right after the new year.

Thus, let us try to read between the lines:

What Steve wrote: From: Steve Ballmer
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 1:39 PM
To: Microsoft–All Employees (QBDG)
Subject: New Leader of Online Services Group

Search, advertising and online services are critical to Microsoft’s long-term strategy. To succeed, we need the right talent. Today, I’m pleased to announce that Qi Lu will join Microsoft as president of our Online Services Group. Qi will oversee all efforts in search, our online advertising platform, and all of our online information and communications services. Qi will join Microsoft on Jan. 5 and report to me.

Translation: Really, taking five months to pick someone to head Microsoft’s most critical arena for the future is not a long time. If you’re counting in dog years, that is! Woof!

But, I digress, we have a winner and, best of all, he’s from Yahoo, costing us $39.9 billion less than it would have cost to get Lu with the whole company.

What Steve wrote: Qi is one of the most respected technical minds in the industry. He comes to Microsoft after 10 years at Yahoo, where he most recently served as executive vice president of engineering for all of Yahoo’s search and advertising development efforts. Before joining Yahoo, Qi was a researcher at IBM’s Almaden Research Center. He has a doctorate in computer science from Carnegie Mellon, and he holds 20 U.S. patents.

Translation: Did I mention that Lu is from Yahoo? Let me say it again: Yahoo. The YAHOO that refused to take our $31 a share offer. That Yahoo. The Yahoo where–at one time–engineers would never consider leaving the Jedi forces of Silicon Valley to join the Death Star.

Jerry Yang, I am your bother.

Also, did I mention 20 patents?

What Steve wrote: Qi’s combination of deep technical expertise, proven leadership capability and broad business knowledge is rare in our industry. There is no one better qualified to guide our work to reinvent search and online advertising.

Translation: By “reinvent,” I mean, stop the endless flow of cash out of Microsoft pockets, even as Google (GOOG) is minting money in the basement of that irksome Googleplex in the search business.

If Lu manages not to lose, say, $3.23 trillion dollars, I will consider it a job well done!

What Steve wrote: While I’m excited that Qi is joining Microsoft, I’m sorry to share the news that Brian McAndrews has decided to transition out of the company. Brian came to us with the acquisition of aQuantive in 2007. Since then, he has helped build a world-class business in online advertising that provides a solid foundation for future growth. I have great respect for the important contributions Brian has made to Microsoft, and I wish him the very best in the future.

Translation: OK, so I dragged my feet on this selection process long enough to make Brian feel really badly, given he wanted the job too.

But, he’s an “ad” guy and Microsoft’s track record with those who don’t consider pocket protectors the height of fashion is, shall we say, rocky.

But don’t feel bad for Brian–Microsoft bought aQuantive for $6 billion last year, and he was CEO. You do the math.

Of course, it would be deeply ironic if Brian suddenly was in the running for the now-open Yahoo CEO job and I was facing him over the negotiating table over the search deal Microsoft has been salivating over, despite trying to seem only mildly interested.

Brian, honey, don’t take it personally that I went for the geek. It’s in my DNA.

What Steve wrote: On Monday at 4 p.m. Pacific Time, Qi will join me at Café RedWest for an Employee Town Hall. I encourage you to attend or to watch the webcast. If you have questions for Qi or me, please send them in advance to and we’ll try to answer as many as possible.

Steve

Translation: Free nachos and unintelligible discussions about algorithms for all!

According to a new report from Forrester Research (FORR) the site references in the post, enterprises will spend much more in the coming years on social networking, RSS, blogs, widgets and such, making it a $4.6 billion market by 2013.

Here is an interesting data table from the ReadWriteWeb post (click on the image to make it larger):

Of course, that doesn’t mean that Twitter’s creators should be jumping up and down now that an actual business plan might be surfacing.

In fact, a lot of popular consumer products might not port over to the business market, even if the concept does.

And, naturally, the old grumps in the IT departments loom large over what gets into corporations and what does not, the ReadWriteWeb piece notes, although other enterprise departments like marketing are already enamored with Web 2.0 tools.

Still security and scaling issues remain paramount, and start-ups that have pioneered these apps in the consumer space might lose business to big copycats like IBM (IBM) and Microsoft (MSFT).

I saw real evidence of the shift at an event in Silicon Valley last week, related to Rohit Bhargava’s new book “Personality Not Included: Why Companies Lose Their Authenticity and How Great Brands Get It Back.”

And, although I expected much more of a corporate love fest, since the affable Bhargava is an SVP of digital strategy and marketing at Ogilvy Public Relations, it turned out to be a very interesting discussion of ways companies could embrace Web 2.0.

I was particularly struck with the very sharp questions from the Silicon Valley-heavy corporate audience too, who were savvy but still curious about the potential pitfalls and benefits of such tools.

Such discussions will be even more interesting, as they percolate across the country to places where most people are just hearing the word widget.

You know, pretty much everywhere except here.