But, from a friend and former co-worker, I learned that the iPhone also doesn’t like it when it gets too hot.

Joris Evers, who now does PR for McAfee, was in Mexico City last month, sitting outside when his iPhone warned him that things had gotten too hot for comfort. It displayed a warning message and told him (in several languages) that the only thing it was willing to do was make an emergency call. Otherwise, it was waiting until things cooled down.

It also turns out that the iPhone, like Mobilized, likes talking about itself in the third person.

Evers said it was warm, not hot, though he was in the direct sun. His laptop was willing to work, despite the conditions.

“I guess iPhones need sun protection in addition to screen protection and fall protection,” Evers mused on his personal blog.

It turns out that if you don’t use the part of the chip that has the problem, it works just fine. The problem is with the SATA port connections on the Cougar Point chipset. There are six such connections and only one is of which four are affected. (For the finer technical points about the design problem, read this post at AnandTech.)

In the days after Intel disclosed the design error on its Cougar Point chipset, PC makers called up to ask if they could continue to ship if they tweaked their designs in such a way that used only the SATA port connections on the Cougar Point chipset that worked. Intel said this was A-OK, and has restarted shipping the chips to those PC makers that have promised to make the necessary changes.

Meanwhile, Intel says it has started manufacturing a new version of the chips, and it should start shipping to new customers later this month

News of the flaw hurt Intel stock last week, mainly because of the potential for financial impact. Intel said it will reduce its revenue forecast for the first quarter by $300 million as it ends production of the old chip and gets volume of the new one ramped up, and that the full impact could reach $700 million for the fiscal year. However, today’s disclosure suggests that Intel may have initially outlined a worst-case scenario just in case. Still, it hasn’t changed its forecast for the quarter. Intel shares, however, are up in after-hours trading.

Update: I corrected this post because I got the number of affected SATA ports on the chip wrong. Sorry about that.

“We’ve been working on this for a very long time. We expect unprecedented demand, bigger than anything we’ve ever seen before. We feel good about being able to handle it.”

– John Stratton, Verizon Wireless COO.

AT&T must be snickering into its cornflakes this morning (okay, perhaps it’s more of a hollow chuckle). Verizon began taking pre-orders for the forthcoming CDMA iPhone this morning and is suffering some of the same issues for which AT&T has been taken to task in the past (though AT&T’s problems were substantially more severe).

I received multiple reports from eager buyers whose purchase attempts were thwarted by infuriatingly slow page loads and/or error messages. Twitter is full of similar notes. This despite Verizon’s claim that the iPhone’s launch on its network would go flawlessly. “We are not going to have any flaws on the execution of the iPhone launch,” Fran Shammo, president and CEO of Verizon’s telecom and business unit, said ealier this year. “We’ve been preparing the network for the last year anticipating the launch of the iPhone.”

Well, perhaps a few flaws, as Verizon Wireless conceded this morning. Still, nowhere near as bad as the ones that troubled AT&T, which had to issue a formal apology.

“We have been processing orders all morning and most customers are not experiencing problems,” spokesperson Brenda Raney told me. “On balance this has been a smooth availability launch. In instances where customers get an error message, they tend to be specific to that individual versus a system wide issue. For example, if customers on a Family SharePlan log in and use a mobile number other than the one belonging to the primary account holder, they will get an error message. We are working to address that now.”

Of course, “on balance” doesn’t help if you are the one who has waited for years for the Verizon iPhone and find yourself unable to order one.

PREVIOUSLY:

• AT&T Now Dropping iPhone Calls and iPhone 4 Pre-Orders
• Apple: Sorry We Sold So Many iPhone 4s Yesterday
• Time to Cut AT&T Some Slack, iPhone Users?

[Error Image Credit: Business Insider]

The company has already stopped making the chip with the problem, but as is always the case with the incredibly complex process of semiconductor manufacturing, doing so is a costly process. Intel said it will reduce its revenue forecast for the first quarter by $300 million as it ends production of the old chip and gets volume of the new one ramped up. Total cost to repair and replace affected materials and computers already sold with the problem chip will be $700 million.

Those with long memories will recall Intel’s Pentium bug in the mid-1990s, which caused a big crisis of confidence in Intel chips, jokes from late-night TV hosts and a drop in the company’s stock price. This error is nothing like that. The company says the processor itself is unaffected.

Analysts are telling investors not to overreact. “Assuming pent-up demand for Sandy Bridge and mild competition, we think impact of this problem will be relatively small,” Standard & Poor’s analyst Clyde Montevirgen told clients in a note today. Mark Moskowitz of J.P. Morgan said it is likely that only a small number of end consumers are affected.

Meanwhile, Intel closed its $1.4 billion deal to acquire the wireless chip division of the German chipmaker Infineon, and said it expects to finally close its $7.7 billion acquisition of McAfee by the end of the quarter.

The combination of those two deals plus the chip trouble caused Intel to issue new guidance for the first quarter. It now expects first-quarter sales in the range of $11.3 billion to $12.1 billion, which is slightly higher than previous guidance. However it shaved three points off its gross margin forecast: The mid-point of the range is now 61 percent, down from 64 percent.

Intel shares are down more than one percent at the moment, while shares of rival Advanced Micro Devices are surging by more than five percent.

In a new RIM video (below), the PlayBook is pitted against the iPad in a side-by-side comparison of “Web fidelity.” And what do you know: The PlayBook comes out looking better. In the video, RIM’s 7-inch tablet pulls up complete Web pages as the iPad slogs behind. Where the PlayBook shows off rich Flash content, the iPad “actually has an error…you’ll see that it says Flash is not supported” and instead delivers a “rather mundane, boring-looking HTML site.” In the Acid 3 test of compatibility with Web standards, the iPad does get an A, but the PlayBook gets an A+ with “pixel-perfect rendering.” And where the PlayBook’s Javascript and HTML5 animations are smooth and fluid, the iPad’s look choppy.

If this is the direction RIM takes with its eventual ad campaign (and if the performance differences are borne out in real-world use), it could score some points. Enough to dent the iPad’s “magic”? Well, we’ll see.

“There have been some suggestions that the decision was based on allegations and not facts,” said Jonathan Todd, a commission spokesman. “With the publication of this decision, you can see precisely the details of the facts and how Intel broke the law.”

Below, a few of those details:

From a series of 2006 Lenovo e-mails:
“As you know I have been negotiating a special deal with Intel. The net is that Intel has made us a very attractive offer that we will end up taking. Our part of this deal is that we will award all business of shipments for the rest of this calendar year to Intel. In exchange, Intel will give us a special deal for both [geographical area] and [geographical area]. The deal is worth millions of dollars.”

“[two Lenovo executives] had a dinner with [an Intel executive] tonight (…). […] When we asked Intel what level of support we will get on NB [notebook] in next quarter, [he] told us (…) the deal is base[d] [sic] on our assumption to not launch AMD NB [notebook] platform. (…) Intel deal will not allow us to launch AMD.”

From a 2002 HP e-mail concerning the company’s negotiation of a rebate agreement with Intel:
“PLEASE DO NOT… communicate to the regions, your team members or AMD that we are constrained to 5 percent AMD by pursuing the Intel agreement.”

From a 2004 HP e-mail:
“You can NOT use the commercial AMD line in the channel in any country, it must be done direct. “If you do and we get caught (and we will) the Intel moneys (each month) is gone (they would terminate the deal). The risk is too high.”

From a 2004 Dell e-mail:
“[Intel senior executives] are prepared for [all-out war] if Dell joins the AMD exodus. We get ZERO MCP for at least one quarter while Intel ‘investigates the details’ (…) We’ll also have to bite and scratch to even hold 50%, including a commitment to NOT ship in Corporate. If we go in Opti [Optiplex corporate desktop line], they cut it to <20% and use the added MCP to compete against us" and "It looks 100% certain that Intel will take MCP to ZERO for at least one quarter while they 'review all of the numbers and implications.' (...) Appears likely that Intel would take MCP to <25% of current levels UNLESS we agree up front not to ship into [Product line]. If we do that, we're in 'détente' mode and can keep MPC [sic] at 50%. However, we don't meet [AMD Senior Executive]'s T&Cs [Terms and Conditions]. So, I would plan on MCP at <20% levels if we execute AMD across [Product line]and [Product line] as AMD wants."

Sounds pretty damning, no? Well, Intel doesn’t think so. In a hastily issued response, the company dismissed the EC’s release of the documents saying, “there’s nothing new here.”

“This Decision reflects the underlying bias we have come to expect from the case team that ran this investigation,” Intel said. “The Commission relied heavily on speculation found in e-mails from lower level employees that did not participate in the negotiation of the relevant agreements. At the same time, they ignored or minimized hard evidence of what actually happened, including highly authoritative documents, written declarations and testimony given under oath by senior individuals who negotiated the transactions at issue.”

“There have been some suggestions that the decision was based on allegations and not facts,” said Jonathan Todd, a commission spokesman. “With the publication of this decision, you can see precisely the details of the facts and how Intel broke the law.”

Below, a few of those details:

From a series of 2006 Lenovo e-mails:
“As you know I have been negotiating a special deal with Intel. The net is that Intel has made us a very attractive offer that we will end up taking. Our part of this deal is that we will award all business of shipments for the rest of this calendar year to Intel. In exchange, Intel will give us a special deal for both [geographical area] and [geographical area]. The deal is worth millions of dollars.”

“[two Lenovo executives] had a dinner with [an Intel executive] tonight (…). […] When we asked Intel what level of support we will get on NB [notebook] in next quarter, [he] told us (…) the deal is base[d] [sic] on our assumption to not launch AMD NB [notebook] platform. (…) Intel deal will not allow us to launch AMD.”

From a 2002 HP e-mail concerning the company’s negotiation of a rebate agreement with Intel:
“PLEASE DO NOT… communicate to the regions, your team members or AMD that we are constrained to 5 percent AMD by pursuing the Intel agreement.”

From a 2004 HP e-mail:
“You can NOT use the commercial AMD line in the channel in any country, it must be done direct. “If you do and we get caught (and we will) the Intel moneys (each month) is gone (they would terminate the deal). The risk is too high.”

From a 2004 Dell e-mail:
“[Intel senior executives] are prepared for [all-out war] if Dell joins the AMD exodus. We get ZERO MCP for at least one quarter while Intel ‘investigates the details’ (…) We’ll also have to bite and scratch to even hold 50%, including a commitment to NOT ship in Corporate. If we go in Opti [Optiplex corporate desktop line], they cut it to <20% and use the added MCP to compete against us" and "It looks 100% certain that Intel will take MCP to ZERO for at least one quarter while they 'review all of the numbers and implications.' (...) Appears likely that Intel would take MCP to <25% of current levels UNLESS we agree up front not to ship into [Product line]. If we do that, we're in 'détente' mode and can keep MPC [sic] at 50%. However, we don't meet [AMD Senior Executive]'s T&Cs [Terms and Conditions]. So, I would plan on MCP at <20% levels if we execute AMD across [Product line]and [Product line] as AMD wants."

Sounds pretty damning, no? Well, Intel doesn’t think so. In a hastily issued response, the company dismissed the EC’s release of the documents saying, “there’s nothing new here.”

“This Decision reflects the underlying bias we have come to expect from the case team that ran this investigation,” Intel said. “The Commission relied heavily on speculation found in e-mails from lower level employees that did not participate in the negotiation of the relevant agreements. At the same time, they ignored or minimized hard evidence of what actually happened, including highly authoritative documents, written declarations and testimony given under oath by senior individuals who negotiated the transactions at issue.”

This is an embarrassing and ham-fisted cataloging error for a company that prides itself on offering complete selection.

It has been misreported that the issue was limited to Gay & Lesbian themed titles–in fact, it impacted 57,310 books in a number of broad categories such as Health, Mind & Body, Reproductive & Sexual Medicine, and Erotica. This problem impacted books not just in the United States but globally. It affected not just sales rank but also had the effect of removing the books from Amazon’s main product search.

Many books have now been fixed and we’re in the process of fixing the remainder as quickly as possible, and we intend to implement new measures to make this kind of accident less likely to occur in the future.

That isn’t going to mollify Amazon’s most vocal critics in the blog- and Twitter-spheres or the ones who ascribe the screw-up to either homophobia or nefarious hackers. But it’s almost certainly going to be the last word from Amazon (AMZN), which is about as tight-lipped as a publicly-held retailer can be.

Wall Street analysts have to beg Amazon to part with even basic financial details. If you think Jeff Bezos and company are going to get into the workings, and failings, of their online catalog, I admire your optimism.