If you've got a firewire port in the machine, you're game over.
Otherwise, it depends on whether there's any direct remote exploits on the version of Windows you're running - I haven't heard of any of those for a long time.
Acquires protection keys from RAM dumps, hibernation files
What's not to believe?
In all fairness, he did say Adobe Acrobat (the expensive PDF maker), not Adobe Acrobat Reader (which is free and only reads them). If you're actually generating content then you may very well start with a blank file and run Acrobat from the icon.
True - I just assumed he meant "reader", most "normal people" I've heard refer to the program either calls it "Adobe PDF" or perhaps "Adobe Acrobat"
I'd kinda assume somebody using the (indeed pretty darn expensive!) Acrobat to know what the program is called... or at least not having an issue typing "Adobe" and then picking acrobat from the result list. Then again, marketing drones...
In DOS, you had to navigate to the directory your application was installed in, or type the full path - and if you hadn't actively installed something like 4DOS, you had to type out everything in full. With the Start Screen (and the new-style Start Menu of Vista and Win7 too), you type a few words (heck, often only a few characters) from the application name. Sure, it takes a bit getting used to the she start-screen of Win8, but it's IMHO more useful than the start menu since it's full-screen and thus can show more information.
But I guess I'm biased - I've always thought the old start menu and it's nested folders was sucky, and have used a combination of quicklaunch bars (DonationCoder's LaunchBarCommander) and keystroke launchers (Find And Run Robot, Launchy) ever since the XP days. I like my keyboard goodness.
also.. if she's attracted to you, it doesn't matter a whole lot what you say. as long as it's not disgusting/repulsive/etc.
"So, umm... wanna come home and check out my tub? I've got a lot of bathing salts."
So there's been a few small details that I think we could have done better, but on the whole I'm *very* happy with git. I think the core design is very solid, and we have almost zero redundant information, and the core model is really built around a few solid concepts that make a lot of sense.
I had hoped to see that answered with "I wish I had started git as libgit+git from the get-go, instead of the hacky shell-script semi-architecture it started with" - but that's (obviously) because I value portability and embeddability in other projects.
Also, while I appreciate Linus' outspoken no-bullshit personality, I find that sometimes it devolves into cursing and rudeness - this is one of the occasions where he's entirely mellow, lucid and reasonable, and that's nice to see
You'd get a +1 if I had mod points - although I would assume Blymie takes offense at the word 'automagic' moreso than the process being... automagic
I guess it wouldn't be a half bad way to manage Gentoo's portage or FreeBSD's ports, but it doesn't seem like a smart idea for binaries - and I wonder if the bulk source (rather than the makefiles, patches and descriptors of a portage/ports system) would be manageable, assuming that most people would want to only download the source for the parts they need. How'd one do that with Git - huge amount of submodules?
They are relatively good but absolutely terrible. -- Alan Kay, commenting on Apollos