Yesterday, shares of Netflix got their semiregular rocket boost–with its stock up more than five percent to close at just over $42–from rumors that Amazon was interested in buying Netflix.

Oh, it’s a seemingly dreamy match–the top online retailer snapping up the upstart U.S. mail-order DVD movie and television show service.

But the speculation completely ignored the giant price needed to buy the Silicon Valley-based Netflix (NFLX)–well above its current $2.43 billion market cap, to be sure–which would be a big chunk of Amazon’s $35 billion valuation.

And it also leaves out the nearly impossible tax problem Amazon (AMZN) would acquire if it ever bought Netflix, given that Netflix has many U.S. distribution locations for its subscription rental business. Amazon does not like paying state taxes and avoids them carefully.

Instead, those interested in seeing the independent company in the embrace of a larger one might want to consider a more suitable and very interested candidate: Microsoft.

Neither Microsoft (MSFT) nor Netflix will comment about such a hookup.

But several sources close to Microsoft told BoomTown that that the partnership between Netflix and Xbox Live to allow users to watch movies and TV episodes on the Xbox 360 device–struck exactly one year ago today–is going like gangbusters, with one saying it was “en fuego.”

Very loosely translated: On fire.

So much so, several sources said, that Robbie Bach–who is president of Microsoft’s Entertainment and Devices division, which includes the Xbox business–has been meeting with Netflix CEO and co-founder Reed Hastings (pictured) in recent weeks about what else the pair can do together to expand its current partnership.

The deal already in place between them is a hit, according to sources at both companies.

It gave Netflix access to 12 million Xbox members and handed Microsoft what has turned out to be a very popular application and an unusually successful joint effort.

While an acquisition would be a much bigger move, some at the software giant think it would necessarily be such a bad one for Microsoft, which has long been seeking to forge better ties in the entertainment arena.

Many of Microsoft’s major Hollywood forays over the years have been duds. So, stronger ties with Netflix–even a more robust partnership, at the very least–would give it a more definitive video strategy most think it lacks.

Its archrival, Google (GOOG), has been trying–with similarly lackluster impact–to accomplish the same results via its pricey and money-losing YouTube unit.

But Netflix–which has an office in Beverly Hills, as well as Los Gatos, Calif.–has much better relationships with the industry there, mostly because it has become such a big buyer of DVDs as it has grown its business (see charts below of subscriber and revenue growth; click on them to make them larger).

In addition, it has added more subscribers than ever in the last year and is solidly profitable, mostly due to sending consumers all those DVDs in little red envelopes.

And while a lot of execs at Hollywood studios that Netflix does business with have been wary–and told me so in no uncertain terms on my recent visit to Los Angeles–about its entry into the digital video delivery business, they have also been thrilled with the checks that Netflix has been writing them since it was founded more than a decade ago.

But, it is that main DVD business that Hastings, in a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal recently, has said is “doomed.”

Noted the article:

“As soon as four years from now, [Hastings] predicts, the business that generates most of Netflix’s revenue today will begin to decline, as DVDs delivered by mail steadily lose ground to movies sent straight over the Internet. So Mr. Hastings, who co-founded the company, is quickly trying to shift Netflix’s business–seeking to make more videos available online and cutting deals with electronics makers so consumers can play those movies on television sets.”

With Internet video still in its infancy–and barely in gestation in terms of any viable business model–Netflix might indeed need help, especially since Hollywood has been slow to give it rights to more movies for online distribution.

That will be increasingly troublesome, given that digital delivery is the way consumers are headed. According to the Journal story, over 20 percent of Netflix members now use the streaming service.

But it only has about 12,000 titles–mostly older films–licensed on its online service, compared to 100,000 DVD rental titles.

That’s because, for now, much more powerful pay channels usually win out over Netflix in these online video distribution wars, which also include Amazon and Apple (AAPL), along with many others.

Thus, even with a strong and unusually long-term executive bench, the close-knit Netflix will still be facing a major battle in moving in a direction it must head in sooner than later

Such an epic journey could be easier for Netflix with a powerful ally like Microsoft.

One more interesting link would make such a relationship even smoother: Hastings is also on the board of Microsoft, having joined in 2007.

So, the savvy and innovative entrepreneur–well-known for his close-to-the-vest dealmaking and eager to not miss a key turn for his company–might very well decide to keep friends very close.

That’s not to say it’s a particularly good or bad idea to hire a former Dreamworks and Wal-Mart (WMT) exec named David Porter (pictured here) as vice president of retail stores to create Microsoft-branded stores–or as the company announced yesterday, “to create a better PC and Microsoft retail purchase experience.”

While Microsoft (MSFT) sells most of its consumer products via big-box retail stores like Best Buy (BBY), and the retail market for just about everything is weak, Apple (AAPL) has definitively proven that a well-designed retail store can be a powerful marketing tool.

The visually stunning and infectiously fun Apple stores, in fact, have been an important part of its recent surge in mainstream consumer appeal, becoming hubs of activity and even social life in its mostly big-city locations.

In fact, that was just the idea behind microsoftSF, which was located in San Francisco’s Metreon Sony Entertainment Center.

The huge 8,500-square-foot store, with 160 Microsoft products and related software and hardware from 30 partners, was billed in a June 1999 press release as “an interactive, hands-on retail environment in which people of all ages, from all walks of life and at all levels of technological expertise can explore the benefits technology can bring them. Far more than just another computer store, microsoftSF is a showcase for the latest technology from Microsoft and the hardware and software companies with which it collaborates.”

The microsoftSF store, which I visited several times (but bought nothing, although I was mostly a PC user at the time), was very attractive and the only such store in the world, with a “Road Warrior” arena, a lounge, a gaming area and more.

Said the press release: “To make all this possible, microsoftSF deploys Microsoft Windows and more than 100,000 feet of copper cable, 60 Sony PCs, 18 laptop docking stations, four dual-processor servers powered by Hewlett-Packard Net Servers, a Cisco Systems network, and an array of hidden audio speakers that create 16 individually controlled sound zones.”

And Microsoft CEO (then President) Steve Ballmer weighed in enthusiastically:

“We are delighted to be able to showcase in this one-of-a-kind retail environment the entire range of Microsoft software and hardware, as well as the technology of other companies who share the vision of how the PC and the Internet can empower people any time, anywhere. San Francisco and the Silicon Valley are home to the world’s largest and one of the most sophisticated high-tech audiences, so this was the natural place to create this site–dedicated to showing, in an interactive environment, the way technology can enhance our working, learning, living and playing.”

Not so much, as it turned out. The store closed in 2001.

But that does not necessarily mean that the new and much expanded efforts will have the same experience. The Metreon, which was sold off by Sony, was an odd mall then and still is, although its movie theater is successful.

And, in this effort, Microsoft will have control of the whole enchilada.

Plus, if well done, it is not such a bad idea to have a place–perhaps only in highly-trafficked locations in big cities–to show off its consumer wares, especially its popular Xbox 360 and other products (please, not the Zune!).

More importantly, given the disaster that has been the Windows Vista experience, it is probably a good idea to have a place to get people interested in Windows 7, especially its touch capabilities, when it rolls out this year.

Also, I still like the Surface interactive table, even if it is mocked in a popular video as a “big-ass table.”

Of course, only Apple stores have done well so far in this genre, as everyone, from Gateway (GTW), Sony (SNE), Nokia (NOK), Helio and Palm (PALM), has had rough retail experiences.

So, Porter certainly has his work cut out for him, at least judging from the press release from Microsoft yesterday:

“Defining the time frame, locations and specifics for planned Microsoft-branded retail stores will be Porter’s first order of business. The purpose of opening these stores is to create deeper engagement with consumers and continue to learn firsthand about what they want and how they buy.”

Said Porter: “There are tremendous opportunities ahead for Microsoft to create a world-class shopping experience for our customers. I am excited about helping consumers make more informed decisions about their PC and software purchases, and we’ll share learnings from our stores with our existing retail and OEM partners that are critical to our success.”

He’ll have to wait to see if the second time is a charm.

Earlier today Microsoft decided it would drop the bomb early by moving its second-quarter earnings conference call with Wall Street analysts to 8 a.m. PST, instead of 2:30 p.m. PST.

Microsoft earlier reported a sharp decline in revenues and net income, as well as layoffs of up to 5,000 employees and other cost cuts.

BoomTown, naturally, had to liveblog the Microsoft (MSFT) event.

8 a.m. PST

Could not get into call, as everyone and their mother wanted into this disaster.

Finally, the call was connected at 8:06 a.m. right in the middle of the bad news being delivered by CFO Chris Liddell, which has already begun to sink into the stock market, causing it to–um–sink even farther.

Liddell’s New Zealand accent was vaguely comforting, but it still cannot put lipstick on this pig. Down, down, down. And did we mention down?

8:09 a.m. PST

The call got handed over to Investor Relations GM Bill Koefoed.

“Adding a bit more color,” he said curiously, as he started to talk about the darkly troubling trends in the PC market.

At least Xbox 360 consoles were doing well, with six million units sold in the quarter. Too bad, it’s not a moneymaker! Well, actually, it has been a money pit, but at least the kids like it!

8:18 a.m. PST

Back to Liddell and more unhappy news on the economy, which was why he said Microsoft is not going to give guidance going forward.

“The economy has obviously declined further than we expected,” said Liddell.

Too obviously!

8:23 a.m. PST

Next up was CEO Steve Ballmer, who was also trying his best to make the bad news sound a little less bad.

But, he noted that the the econalypse was a “once-in-a-lifetime set of economic conditions.”

You can say that again, and Ballmer did.

But he soon was underlining Microsoft’s product pipeline and his bullishness on the tech sector.

“We are prioritizing, we are focusing,” Ballmer said. “[But] the pause the economy is imposing on our business will be just that.”

8:31 a.m. PST

First question was about whether Microsoft had acted quickly enough to cut costs amid the carnage.

Liddell answered this one: Of course!

Ballmer added that fixed costs at Microsoft make it hard to make better margins when revenue is declining.

But cost-cutting has now become priority one.

The next one was about the layoffs, including costs of it and if contractors are impacted.

Nope, though they will be getting cut too, said Liddell. But the 5,000 jobs announced are all just Microsofties.

Ballmer then jumped in and noted that the company would also be adding jobs, with a net of 3,000 jobs cut.

The third question was about buyback of stock, which was slowing, as execs said earlier. Wall Street loves buybacks. Also, what about PC growth?

Capital preservation was more important than ever said Liddell, noting that merger and acquisition activity will be lower in the next quarter.

As to the PC market–”a continuing or slight deterioration,” said Liddell.

The fourth question: More about the PC market and where to reset it.

Noted Ballmer: “It’s dynamic.” Which, I think, translates to “I don’t know exactly.”

The fifth question was about layoffs and costs again.

Will Microsoft cut again? Or do increasing expenses on a relative basis mean that Ballmer anticipates a rebound?

“We’re not used to down markets,” said Ballmer. “[But] our model is not for a quick rebound.”

Instead, Ballmer repeated his assertion that this was a wholesale resetting of the economy, which will build back on a lower level.

8:45 a.m. PST

GAAP earnings question. Zzzzzzz.

Next one was on whether Microsoft should commit to more buybacks of its stock instead of doing less?

Wall Street loves buybacks!

Sorry, but Microsoft was going to be more liquid going forward, said Ballmer.

The next question went back to why guidance for expenses is higher year over year, if the outlook was so bad.

Liddell noted it was a change in “momentum” of spending, which was slower.

8:50 a.m. PST

The questioner wanted to know about the annuity business versus the more volatile consumer sector.

Obviously, said Liddell, Microsoft likes regular money coming over the transom, but that could also decline in the future.

Now a question for Ballmer on what Microsoft might divest.

“I like our portfolio,” said Ballmer flatly.

The last question was about Yahoo (YHOO) and Microsoft’s ongoing talks about an alliance of some sort! Finally!

“I don’t think I have anything to say about Yahoo,” said Ballmer, after he laughed a bit with the other execs.

As he has previously noted, he still wants a search deal, said Ballmer. But not acquisition, added Liddell.

Ballmer noted that Microsoft was not an M&A company, in general.

In other words, Microsoft was still not buying Yahoo.

They say that only the grass gets trampled when elephants fight. And that grass might actually turn out to be Yahoo in the epic battle between Microsoft and Google.

While the New York Times spilled a lot of ink earlier this week in a very long piece about that massive mano-a-mano, the true fallout in the online ad space, at least, could be more painful for the No. 2 player–Yahoo–which sits smack in between No. 1 Google and No. 3 Microsoft.

Yesterday, that was clearly in evidence in a kind of round-tripping ad deal Microsoft struck with Viacom, a five-year strategic partnership that was valued at $500 million by the two parties.

It’s pretty simple, really. Microsoft dips into its massive cash coffers and buys ads on Viacom’s many online and offline media outlets and it also licenses Viacom content–from places like MTV and Comedy Central–for its online MSN and Xbox 360 services.

Viacom scores!

For that, Viacom has agreed to use Microsoft’s digital ad-serving technology and also will let it sell some of its display ads on its–who knew?–300 Web sites. (Of course, Microsoft handed Viacom yet another one of those economically unsound guaranteed ad deals that both it and Google are so fond of doing these days.)

Viacom scores again!

Naturally, Google was not in the competitive mix, given Viacom is suing its YouTube unit for $1 billion over copyright-infringement issues.

And Viacom also got to smack Google again, since it dumped DoubleClick–the online ad network that Google is in the midst of acquiring–and replace it with Microsoft’s Atlas service (which the software giant picked up in its recent purchase of aQuantive).

Yep. Viacom. Scores. Yet Again. (Except the Microsoft-Viacom deal probably has now provided Google with some air cover about complaints–leveled by Microsoft to government regulators–that it had a dangerous monopoly over online advertising with its DoubleClick purchase, which means it is more likely to be approved now.)

While this is all very clash-of-the-titans, with most of the benefit accruing to Viacom, one has to wonder where this leaves Yahoo–considered the longest-standing and doubtlessly most experienced seller of display ads–in this war.

Viacom did pick Yahoo to manage its search-ad business earlier this year, and this deal with Microsoft will not impact that.

But Yahoo’s game in the future is not in the monetization of search, which Google dominates, but in turbocharging its graphical and video ad business, an area in which it has the best shot at differentiating itself. It should have been in this fight, but it was not mentioned once.

And watching Viacom work the Microsoft-Google Cold War, it feels a lot like what Facebook did recently when it expertly played the bickering pair against each other over its financing and the right to sells its international ads.

Given Yahoo keeps losing in this kind of warmongering (to be fair, it can’t even contemplate competing in what will surely turn insane), you almost want Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang to get while the getting is good and auction off his company’s crown jewel–its search monetization business–to the highest bidder.

If that was the case, if Yang was bold enough to do it and willing to swallow a little pride, I would think we haven’t nearly begun to see just how high both Google and Microsoft can bid.