As usual before yet another big Apple event, the psychic friends network is in overdrive in anticipation of the iconic computer company’s “Let’s Rock” media gathering in San Francisco tomorrow.

At this point, I think Apple could announce a change in the color of its bathrooms at its Cupertino HQ and it would be mayhem among the Mac faithful.

Nonetheless, even though what will be announced is likely to be a series of incremental improvements for Apple’s line of music-playing products–iTunes, iTouch and, of course, the iPod–and even the possibility of a revamped design, it’s astonishing how striking the hype is around the event.

Of course, that kind of passion from core users is a blessing for any tech company, and it is hard to quibble with Apple’s stellar ability to market every jog and tittle of its product development as if it was the second coming.

But the most intense focus will more likely be on Apple’s leader, CEO Steve Jobs, whose gaunt appearance at the Worldwide Developers Conference in June set off a flurry of discussion about the exact state of his health.

That talk has since been less frantic, despite the fact that there actually has been no clear announcement from Apple (AAPL) on the delicate subject (and Jobs’s colorful off-the-record chat with the New York Times’s Joe Nocera does not count, folks).

In any case, because AllThingsD.com cannot resist either, Digital Daily’s John Paczkowski will be there liveblogging “Let’s Rock” from the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts, with all the news that’s fit to post.

And, of course, everything else too.

There will be a lot of different reactions to the first of Microsoft’s newest series of commercials, featuring Founder Bill Gates playing straight man to comic Jerry Seinfeld.

Set up as a discount shoe-buying skit, Seinfeld helps Gates purchase a pair called “The Conquistador,” and for some Seinfeldesque reason, it’s churros all around.

Actually, it feels a lot like the frequent and excellent Microsoft internal spoof videos Gates does with various celebs.

I have always liked them a lot and I like this one too, as it is quirkily charming (or is it charmingly quirky?).

But I am not sure the Gates-Seinfeld kibitzing will really get a lot of people talking about Microsoft (MSFT) products, as is the marketing goal.

And they surely are no where near as spot-on as Apple’s famed PC-Mac guys commercials, which are memorable and witty and deliver the message that Apple (AAPL) products are better.

What might be more effective, of course, at least in the Internet arena, is for Microsoft to get off the stick and lay out its next Web strategy clearly, especially in the wake of its failed attempt to acquire Yahoo (YHOO), and name the digital chief it said it planned to.

Several sources with knowledge of the situation expect an internal choice to helm the part of the business that was run by former Microsoft exec Kevin Johnson, who left after the software giant’s bid for Yahoo failed.

Although an external star coming in would be CEO Steve Ballmer’s top choice, I would guess, top internal contenders are Brian McAndrews, who came to the company via its $6 billion aQuantive acquisition, and longtime exec Yusuf Mehdi, who was Johnson’s strategy guy.

(BoomTown votes for a combination of both to make it extra complex!)

In any case, if it is serious about taking on rival Google (GOOG) in the online ad space and becoming at least the No. 2 player in the market, Microsoft has to move sooner than later and definitely much faster and it has a lot of options.

With Yahoo’s stock circling the drain, closing yesterday at $17.75, will Microsoft think about another bid for even a part of the Internet company?

Or will it try, as it claims, to get truly serious about building its business organically with programs like Live Search cashback, a deeper focus on vertical search improvements in places like video, images and mapping, and more content on its MSN sites?

Or should it be aggressively looking around for other properties to purchase to bolster its Web assets, such as the company that owns the Ciao price comparison and online shopping sites in Europe, for which it just forked over $500 million?

Of course, Microsoft will likely keep trying all of these, although I hope not in the muddling way it has behaved for far too long.

Johnson was entirely right in his internally controversial concept that being one of the top players on the Web is key to Microsoft’s future, even more than its lucrative Windows software hegemony.

(If you want to read an interesting take as to why, don’t miss New York Times columnist Joe Nocera’s “Does Windows Still Matter?” post yesterday).

And with Google’s new foray into the browser business this week, Microsoft surely has to be certain that it does not lose in the one place it does dominate.

In other words, Microsoft has a lot of work ahead of it, well beyond amusing us with Gates doing a thankfully hands-free adjustment of his boxer shorts.

In any case, you should see that, so here’s the first Gates-Seinfeld commercial:

So, I have been standing by, trying to make sense of the debate that has swirled around Apple CEO, Co-Founder and font-of-all, Steve Jobs, with regard to his health or, more specifically, the lack thereof.

And after listening to all of the debate about it–mostly indignant declarations by the media, making their case mostly by wheedling milder indignant declarations from stock analysts and corporate tsk-tsk outfits–I have concluded that what is ailing Jobs is exactly no one’s business.

Even if his every breath is critical to the ongoing operations of Apple, the reason most use as their main argument for Jobs to tell all, it goes double.

Why?

Well, any Apple (AAPL) investor has to know by now that Jobs suffered from a rather serious bout with a curable version of pancreatic cancer some years ago and that recovery includes inevitable complications.

That was on display when he took to the stage of Apple’s most recent Worldwide Developers Conference in mid-June and looked really gaunt and unhealthy. It was obviously hard to look away.

People immediately reacted like it was the end of the world–which is no surprise given Apple’s rabid following–and began to suddenly acquire instant medical degrees and diagnose Jobs on the spot.

In its typically secretive style, Apple did not help matters by throwing out a thin gruel of information and noting it was only a common bug.

Of course, that felt like a bigger whopper than usual–even if he did, in fact, also have a cold, it kind of begged the question of what accounted for the rest of his haggard appearance.

In any case, the chatter went on and on, right up until the most recent quarterly earnings call when Apple’s CFO said, when asked that Jobs’s health, that it was a “private matter.”

Immediately, that sent the debate into a frenzy, as armchair word detectives went into overdrive about exactly what that meant. (Personally, I think it meant that Apple was saying Jobs’s health was a private matter.)

This weekend, the noise level reached a quantum level after Jobs made a can’t-make-this-up statement to New York Times columnist Joe Nocera, who was inquiring as to Jobs’s well-being:

“This is Steve Jobs. You think I’m an arrogant [expletive] who thinks he’s above the law, and I think you’re a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong.”

Now that just cracked me up, given all that had gone on before, although some were once again indignant over the gall of a major company CEO making such a statement.

Obviously, they have never met or heard Jobs, who is well known for doing such things pretty much all the time.

And that’s the problem here and my main argument for leaving him be:

1) As I said, Apple investors who have not figured Jobs’s precarious health–after a round with any kind of cancer–into their investment strategies about Apple going forward need some serious reality medication themselves.

Guess what? Jobs has been really sick and it means he is going to have a harder time with any kind of infection or complication for the rest of his life, and he will likely be more delicate than someone who has not had cancer.

By the way, the take-away from the Nocera article and an earlier one last week in the New York Times was that Jobs had been quite ill, but not life-threateningly ill. Which was Jobs’s way of getting out the news.

2) Jobs is one of the most important CEOs, in relation to his company, around. (Warren Buffett, who did choose to reveal all when he was sick, is the other.) And that’s another thing investors should be figuring into their calculations on the worth of the stock.

As Jobs himself said in a famous commencement speech to Stanford University: “No one wants to die. And yet death is the destination we all share. No one has ever escaped it.”

You don’t have to get as dramatic as all that to know that when you are talking about such a charismatic and critical CEO as Jobs, any lack of involvement by him–like say going on a year-long yoga retreat–is going to be a problem that investors are buying when they buy the stock.

Of course, there are other Apple employees making things work at the company, although it sometimes feels as if Jobs is crafting every iPhone that goes out.

But it’s obviously the Steve Jobs Show, and investors risk that when they buy such a ticket–kind of like anyone who bought a ticket to Celine Dion’s recent show in Las Vegas and hoped she would not get, like, a common cold!

3) And, of course, we get to the secretive Apple culture story line in every single story, which is trotted out like it is a surprise and we should all be so angry about it and demand change.

Again, have we not been paying attention all these many years? When has Apple not been secretive, except when it suits itself?

Here are a few more shockers for those still stewing about Apple’s secretiveness: Sen. Barack Obama is African-American and Sen. John McCain is old and some people in the country are racist and ageist and may hold those things against them in the upcoming Presidential election!

All kidding aside, it’s the same media that wait in eager anticipation when Jobs doles out the often-disingenuous tidbits about various Apple products coming and then hype them to the high heavens for him when he deigns to unveil them.

In other words, the Steve Jobs you are getting right now is the Steve Jobs you have always gotten–on his terms, what he wants to say and when and how.

So don’t be surprised when he does just that.

Meanwhile, Jobs has come to our D: All Things Digital conference many times and chatted up a storm. Here he is in a highlights reel of the historic joint interview with Microsoft CEO and Founder Bill Gates in 2007.

In it, Jobs is quite voluble about their longtime rivalry and also reveals their secret relationship that dares not speak its name (he is kidding):

And then the New York Times’s Joe Nocera called for it in an eviscerating column this past weekend that articulated what an increasing number of people in Silicon Valley and Wall Street and, more importantly, within Yahoo have been thinking of late.

And that it is: Whether Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang (pictured here at D6) should step down in favor of another top executive to lead the troubled Internet company into the next era.

It’s the obvious question, of course, to ask whether the co-founder of Yahoo has what it takes to manage the company through what will doubtlessly be a very difficult year.

(Speaking of that, see this disturbing hiring freeze post by Peter Kafka of Silicon Alley Insider, which might spell trouble ahead at Yahoo.)

BoomTown asked Yang specifically why he was the right leader for Yahoo going forward at our sixth D: All Things Digital conference recently and–guess what?–he did not really have an answer to the question.

Let me for him, then: The main reason he is the right leader is due to his history, his obvious love for Yahoo and its employees and that his heart, as Yang said in his one and only passionate moment onstage, does bleed Yahoo purple.

Unfortunately, as important and touching as those things are, it’s probably not enough for the rough road ahead for Yahoo.

As Yahoo continues to be in limbo, pressure is sure to mount heavily on Yang, and it is not a stretch to imagine he will not remain in the top job at the troubled company for the long term.

So who would be good to replace him?

The list is a long one and could include execs like Tim Armstrong of Google, Kevin Johnson of Microsoft and any number of media and advertising execs.

But I have six candidates I like, so here’s my short list, in no particular order (and remember, the last time I made one for the job of the No. 2 leader for Facebook, its current COO Sheryl Sandberg was high on my list).

Sue Decker

Yahoo President Sue Decker (pictured here) is the obvious choice for Yang to hand over the reins to.

But should he?

Here are the positives: Decker is smart, articulate, financially savvy and a well-known quantity within Yahoo.

And, like Yang, she has worked her heart out there for many years.

But there are some significant negatives, starting with the tarnish of the whole Microsoft takeover saga, which most think both she and Yang have handled badly.

After so much confusion and missed opportunities, it is not clear if the troops at Yahoo or, perhaps more importantly, Wall Street and the company’s shareholders will give Decker the kind of running room she needs.

In addition, again and again, many within Yahoo talk about Decker’s lack of product feel and overall vision that will be required to truly give Yahoo the kick in the pants it so sorely needs.

Plus, Decker has been around Yahoo a long time and is clearly part of the leadership group that has allowed the company to languish for so long.

Nonetheless, Decker clearly remains the front-runner and might blossom if she had full control over Yahoo, as Bob Iger of Disney (DIS) did there, for example.

Meg Whitman

While many do not know it, Meg Whitman (pictured here) was almost the CEO of Yahoo once, but lost the chance due to a botched merger attempt between Yahoo and eBay (EBAY) back in Web 1.0.

Think of the might-have-beens of that union.

There is no doubt Whitman is an Internet exec star, despite the fact that she herself admits having done as much as she could at eBay after a decade when she recently stepped down as CEO there.

But that kind of candor is exactly what is most impressive about Whitman, who is straight-talking, and very, very tough, despite a sunny-seeming exterior.

She has certainly impressed Yahoos already, having appeared in the not-too-distant past at a sales conference, where she blew away the crowd with her grasp of Yahoo’s business.

Here’s the problem: Most expect the Republican Whitman to make her next move in the California political arena. Can you say Governor Whitman? Senator Whitman?

And also, she’s about as rich as you can be and any monetary attraction to reviving Yahoo would probably be negligible.

Peter Chernin

Let’s be clear–we’re not putting Peter Chernin (pictured here and BoomTown’s kind-of boss) in this list to kiss up to him.

While News Corp. (NWS), where Chernin is No. 2, is the owner of this site, I and many others consider him (along with Disney’s Iger) to be one of the sharpest and most versatile “old” media execs to get the Web.

At the very least, he does not seem scared senseless by it. (Which is a very big deal.)

And while he probably presides over one of the choicest media conglomerates out there, CEO Rupert Murdoch shows no signs of retiring, and his son, James Murdoch, is clearly training in the wings.

A move to Yahoo would be a bold one for someone like Chernin, who clearly has the tough management chops to run the place and give it direction to become a true partner to Hollywood in the way the Spock clones of Google never ever will be able to.

Actually, given he has a foot in both old and new media (Hulu.com, MySpace), he is BoomTown’s No. 1 pick.

Marc Andreessen

I had included Marc Andreessen (pictured here) in my list as a possible No. 2 exec at Facebook as a bit of a lark, just to remind folks that vision matters.

For his excellent blog alone, Andreeseen deserves a lot of attention for its bracing insight about the Internet business and its future.

And Andreessen has plenty of real-life chops too, from his founding Netscape right up until today, creating a series of new Web companies (he is currently chairman of a social-networking company called Ning) and investing in a lot of others that have given him a lot of gravitas and financial windfalls over the years.

Let me clearly state, I was not sure Andreessen could ever grow out of his enfant-terrible mode when I covered him several years ago, but that has clearly happened.

He knows how to build exciting companies, he is well-liked in Silicon Valley, he knows about scale, he knows about social networking and he is a respected technologist.

Most of all, Andreessen would be a leader who would add a lot of excitement to Yahoo. And, believe me, Yahoo needs a lot of that.

Dan Rosensweig

I know, I know. But why not?

Some might question my choice of Dan Rosensweig (pictured here), mostly because he departed from Yahoo in a previous crisis, but was still part of the management group that got Yahoo into this mess in the first place.

But, think hard. Rosensweig was not in charge then–in fact, leadership failures fell to former CEO Terry Semel and also Yang.

In addition, many at Yahoo–though not all–thought Rosensweig did a decent job of running the place.

He also wanted Yahoo to take a lot more chances than it did and is well liked in Silicon Valley and Wall Street.

In leaving and then returning, Rosensweig might represent a choice that allows Yahoo employees to feel confident that some of its past soul remains.

Mark Cuban

I am not kidding. Not even one little bit.

I know Mark Cuban (pictured here hoofing with gusto) is disliked by Yang and others at Yahoo for selling Broadcast.com to Yahoo back in the last bubble and then clearing out and making bank.

And I know they were furious that Cuban popped up on Icahn’s alternative board to replace Yahoo’s current board.

So what! Big whoop! Blah, blah, blah.

Because Yahoo needs a major restart and Cuban would easily be able to push that button.

Cuban is unorthodox, has clear business acumen and success, knows how to invest and he is loaded for bear with vision.

He is also dabbling in some very interesting arena of HDTV, as well as being involved in some other interesting investments.

Cuban is willing to be controversial and often takes aim at Google, with some good results, in his blog.

His current post: “Hulu Is Kicking YouTube’s Ass.” (Ahahahahahaha. Dang, I wish I had written it.)

It’s that kind of moxie that means he is probably the only one with the guts to really get down in the weeds of Yahoo and start hacking away at the tangle that needs hacking.

Also, Cuban can sure dance.

And, most of all, the next CEO of Yahoo is going to need to know how to do some very complex two-stepping–with Wall Street, with shareholders and with employees.

And he or she is going to have to look good doing it.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

Here are two pieces this week, from the multitude of them about the continuing turmoil at Yahoo (YHOO), that really stand out for me.

Both encapsulate the dicey situation that the troubled Internet company finds itself in now–which is to say very dicey.

One from The Wall Street Journal’s Dennis K. Berman–titled “Who Played It Worse: Microsoft or Yahoo?”–comes to the only conclusion: Both.

Wrote Berman: “Never have so few failed so many for so much at stake.”

Money quote on Yahoo, referring to its ad-outsourcing deal with Google (GOOG):

Consider the state of Yahoo now: Thrust into the arms of Google, it now is forced to admit it can’t develop the technology to compete head-on with the Googleplex. It is as if IBM were to admit it could no longer build a big server, or Toyota were to give up on the Corolla and start selling Honda Civics.”

But a more devastating indictment of Yahoo and its CEO and Co-Founder Jerry Yang comes from New York Times columnist Joe Nocera, called “Oh, Jerry, It’s No Longer Your Baby.”

While Nocera, whom I know and admire, is not saying anything new about Yang’s glacial management of the company and Yahoo’s boneheaded handling of the Microsoft (MSFT) situation, his bracing prose in the form of a poison pen letter sums it all up perfectly.

Wrote Nocera, as he shoved the shiv in: “I haven’t seen this much contempt for shareholders since Robert Nardelli [pictured here] ran Home Depot.”

After recounting the sins against Yahoo shareholders, here’s the money quote:

Jerry, you’re a billionaire because people all over the world bought your stock, and trusted you to do right by them. That’s the compact you make when you take a company public: you get to be really rich, but in return, you have an obligation to do everything you can to ensure that shareholders get a healthy return on their investment. It doesn’t matter that you would like Yahoo to remain independent, or that you can’t stand Microsoft. Your feelings aren’t supposed to get in the way of your fiduciary duty.

A takeover by Microsoft was your last, best hope of rewarding your long-suffering shareholders. Now that opportunity is gone. It says here Mr. Icahn is not going to go as gently into the night as Mr. Ballmer did–and if I were a betting man, I would be taking odds that your days as Yahoo’s CEO are numbered.

It’ll be better for everyone to have someone in that role who understands who he’s supposed to be working for. Wouldn’t you agree?”

I would–but much more on that diciest of subjects for Yahoo next.