GIT is good to be used for faster and high availability operations during code release cycle. Git provides a complete replica of the repository on the developer's local system which is why every developer will have complete repository available for quick access on his system and they can merge the specific branches that they have worked on back to the centralized repository. The limitations with GIT are seen when checking in large files.
I think Remember the Milk is a great tool for managing tasks and information. However, it depends on what the person is looking for. If you are looking for just a simple task management tool without any bells and whistles, this may be a lot, as it has a lot of advanced features (and even more if you go pro). If you are looking for a more robust task management tool with the option to add priorities, tags, categories, and assign tasks to others, this may be more suited for this. It is also helpful for managing lists like shopping lists or project lists.
Git has met all standards for a source control tool and even exceeded those standards. Git is so integrated with our work that I can't imagine a day without it.
I am not sure what the official Git support channels are like as I have never needed to use any official support. Because Git is so popular among all developers now, it is pretty easy to find the answer to almost any Git question with a quick Google search. I've never had trouble finding what I'm looking for.
I've used both Apache Subversion & Git over the years and have maintained my allegiance to Git. Git is not objectively better than Subversion. It's different. The key difference is that it is decentralized. With Subversion, you have a problem here: The SVN Repository may be in a location you can't reach (behind a VPN, intranet - etc), you cannot commit. If you want to make a copy of your code, you have to literally copy/paste it. With Git, you do not have this problem. Your local copy is a repository, and you can commit to it and get all benefits of source control. When you regain connectivity to the main repository, you can commit against it. Another thing for consideration is that Git tracks content rather than files. Branches are lightweight and merging is easy, and I mean really easy. It's distributed, basically every repository is a branch. It's much easier to develop concurrently and collaboratively than with Subversion, in my opinion. It also makes offline development possible. It doesn't impose any workflow, as seen on the above linked website, there are many workflows possible with Git. A Subversion-style workflow is easily mimicked.
Google Tasks is a much simpler task-keeping interface, and I use it for the most important tasks on my phone. It does not offer tags, priorities, or distinguish between lists/tasks. It does let me star tasks, but does not let me determine the priority levels. I can also move tasks to different lists, but they can be hard to manage if there are too many, so I generally do not use this feature. For me, Google Tasks is ideal for very simple "I need to write this down" type tasks that are of high priority. It is not a good brain dumping tool because tasks can easily get lost. This is more for those nagging tasks that I want to do and make sure there is an appropriate alarm for. It also integrates well with my Android home screen. However, when I have lots of tasks I want to categorize, or I do want to do more of a brain dump type thing, I think Remember the Milk is far better. I can have more control over priorities, tags, assigning tasks to others, and other robust features.
Git has saved our organization countless hours having to manually trace code to a breaking change or manage conflicting changes. It has no equal when it comes to scalability or manageability.
Git has allowed our engineering team to build code reviews into its workflow by preventing a developer from approving or merging in their own code; instead, all proposed changes are reviewed by another engineer to assess the impact of the code and whether or not it should be merged in first. This greatly reduces the likelihood of breaking changes getting into production.
Git has at times created some confusion among developers about what to do if they accidentally commit a change they decide later they want to roll back. There are multiple ways to address this problem and the best available option may not be obvious in all cases.
