Is that image on the top-right trying to show that somebody lost a limb? What is that?

100,000 chips worth $190,000?

I don't think Intel will be too peeved that someone made off with a vanful of 233MHz, Pentium IIs. Because at $1.90 each, that's about the vintage of chip the thieves got.

...Unless, of course, I'm paying 500 times too much for the latest Core Duo.

This is where open-source OSes really make themselves most useful. Linux, FreeBSD, BeOS, and others allow and encourage programmers to have their fun installing it on their PCs, laptops, and toasters. This lets programmers satisfy their "tinkering" itch. But, unfortunately, Linux isn't as polished as OSX and therefore presents less of a challenge. There's an inherent "cool" factor in installing Apple's latest closed OS on custom hardware.

The tech community is a culture of challenges. If a challenge presents itself, hackers will attack it--the larger the challenge, the greater number of attempts. Take, for example, the challeng of getting Windows onto an iMac. Even Steve Jobs and Apple itself both thrive on being challenged. (Can we make a smaller iPod!? Conquer the living room? Take on Dell and HP?) But unfortunately, this DMCA move by Apple may be presenting a challenge to the hacking/cracking community that hasn't existed previously and will therefore only incite MORE programmers to attack OSX, both through viruses and illegal installations.

Apple has the right to protect their product. They even have the right to through hackers in jail. But to do so would unleash a firestorm of (very talented) backlash that may well knock Apple of the top of the security pedestal and ultimately kill their product. Maybe Apple's best PR move would be to open-source the OS and concentrate on making money by selling the best-designed computers in the world. (and the iPod.) The hackers would love them for it, the typical consumer wouldn't notice, and the virus writers would (maybe) grant OSX a reprieve.