[antiRepublicrat]

You aren't making any point at all.

If it doesn't matter, then do you have any idea why *NIX dumped Crypt()? It's called security in layers, and Microsoft just lost one of its layers.

Using a sufficiently strong salt/password is no more unbreakable than using a sufficently strong Windows password.

... which would have to be much longer than is common practice in the industry, meaning most Windows computers today are vulnerable.

[Bush2000]

If it doesn't matter, then do you have any idea why *NIX dumped Crypt()? It's called security in layers, and Microsoft just lost one of its layers.

That's irrelevant. You've already eliminated physical security. Nothing else matters. The box is compromised.

... which would have to be much longer than is common practice in the industry, meaning most Windows computers today are vulnerable.

Sigh. You keep repeating this lie over and over again. No, n00b. You would have to have physical access to the machine in order to get the hashes; in that case ANY MACHINE REGARDLESS OF OS IS COMPROMISED.