Apple sells a fucked-over, incredibly latency-enhanced version of an operating system first sold on 68k machines more than superficially similar to macintoshes (even used ADB) on which it was fairly responsive. They sell it to you on PC clones whose claims to fame are a pretty case, and the ability to mostly correctly run Apple's antique-but-revised operating system.
If you want to bash Apple, do it right. OS X is not based on any m68k code. You could discuss about how OS X has poor POSIX compatibility (even though it has a Unix license - Just like Windows does with it's POSIX subsystem). You could talk about how the OpenGL support being broken, badly made drivers, hardware issues that to this day have not been resolved - including too much thermal paste on the processor or badly done soldering on their "logic boards".
But "latency-enhanced version of an operating system first sold on 68k machines"? That is complete rubbish.
Instead of sitting around on Slashdot crying like a bunch of babies who can't open a bottle of milk, put your comments in the official record. Tell the FCC what you think.
I've let them know that I think Apple should be able to do what they want with their platform.
I've not yet used the latest OpenSolaris, but if memory serves, a good deal of GNU utilities were the default in OpenSolaris instead of the native Solaris ones.
On the installations I've had, not a single one had GNU utilities as default. GNU ulities were named things like ggrep in the default path. If you wanted to make them default you had to override the path settings for/usr/gnu/bin/ over/usr/bin.
It is Solaris at its core, so binary compatibility needs to stay in place for legacy support.
What the crap? What is so different about GNU's crontab and Solaris's crontab for binary compatability? Why can't they update Solaris's crontab to have these features?...
OpenSolaris also comes with GNU binaries (which are conveniently already in the default path). To differentiate, they are called gtar, ggrep, etc
There was a reason why I chose my wording ("default") carefully. One of the first things I do with a Solaris installation is set/usr/gnu/bin/ as a primary path over/usr/bin, because I cannot stand the fact that they can't add support for more features into their existing utilities to the point that everything from compression in tar and recursive grepping (why can't get they add a -r switch? Seriously, why? Why would binary compatibility stop this?).
At a loss of what you mean here. ZFS, brandz/zones and crossbow are huge;
I was speaking more specifically about userland. Kernel wise, Solaris has had a few enhancements over the years. Although comparing brandz, zones, containers - There are equilivant Linux technologies that exist to those already which is not bringing that much of a difference to Linux users who are in the know.
ZFS, it seems like a good technology, but my own experiences with it was getting annoyed at the OS constantly because it didn't support devices that in theory (according to hardware support on the website), should have been supported correctly so it was constantly running in a degraded state. Which, lead to some rather strange problems with data that I couldn't resolve (despite it being promoted as some kind of extremely fault tolerant system).
I'm a Solaris admin; which can make me a bit of a Sun snob, but this was not meant to be a OpenSolaris is superior to Linux comment.
I'm platform agnostic, I think pretty much all x86 operating systems suck. I have gripes with all of them. The number one method to start me ranting on Linux is to bring up the sound system - Something that Solaris (where hardware is supported) does far better currently.
Hmmm... I just started using OpenSolaris and I think svcadm is significantly easier to deal with than the old init.d stuff. Init scripts are probably easier for the more Unix experienced though.
I was pretending to be one of those Unix administrators that don't like anything different and want a pure original Unix model in that response - As the original poster said:
the traditional UNIX way of doing things
---
I don't mind the Java stuff, my server box is quite powerful, and has 8GB of RAM.
Not that RAM makes much of a difference at starting the runtime. I mean, it's not like I'm using it on a system with less than 4GB of RAM to begin with. I don't think the differences between 4GB RAM (which is mostly unused) and 8GB are really going to effect the start up performance of java application by that much.
now most people don't think twice about using C++ but complain about Java.
C++ doesn't randomly decide to take 15 seconds (I don't really care about what is to blame as much as the fact it just is) to start what seems to be a very simple application to begin with.
By the way, Dtrace isn't kernel only - its also the basis of "instruments" in OS X - and "instruments" rocks - even for general purpose app development using Xcode.
I stopped doing development on OS X when having to deal with buggy graphics drivers and OpenGL being broken, this was before dtrace was available on the OS. So you have me at a disadvantage there.
I have only ever used dtrace on Solaris and did not really find a very practical use for it outside of kernel development. For general userland applications, it's not very useful.
Just that there are plenty of reasons Linux pisses me off
Such as?
but it could be so much better if many of the people developing for it stopped reinventing the wheel for the sake of reinventing the wheel...
Can I get a comparison with something?
If this is that tried argument on different Linux distributions, where by they are reinventing things or doing different things on different distributions - This is no different from the BSDs, Unix systems and hell, even going more specific, the Solaris-based distributions.
Well, yes and it is cool, actually. But they are "gamers" (which does not mean they are primitive, it means kinda different profile).
Second life is not a game, it's a virtual world. It also has quite a few large companies inside it who have established their own presence, not withstanding IBM, AMD, Intel, ATi etc. But hey, someone asks me to name an enterprise, I'll name one. If you want to make another one, more serious about money - New York Stock Exchange also uses Debian (along with other Linux distros too) with HP's support contracts.
That means I still agree with you that apt/dpkg is sweet.:-)
I am a different poster from before.:)
They also on MySQL, they don't need talk to FSA and such, they don't have lots of policital sh*t and so on.
I do recall a rather sad story of how they got MySQL devs to come in and help them deal with load issues, devs came in, took a look at how much traffic was going through to MySQL, threw their hands up and left. Linden lab have been trying hard to solve their database load issues on their own ever since.
You can not do it online, only offline, right? (not really remember what is currently now).
I do snapshots online. There is a small problem people who are less experienced with LVM encounter a problem where by the partition to goes read only for a moment.
Your LVM will require another slice for this, as oppose to ZFS.
True, but this doesn't really bother me. I have snapshots taken every hour, at the end of the week the snapshots are backed up to a secondary server and hourly snapshots are merged into daily snapshots after two weeks, after two months they're merged into monthly snapshots.
I could leave them as daily snapshots, but I have never needed to get so specific on time after all that time.
It is also using quite a space to do so, while ZFS does not
Perhaps, never really noticed that much of a significant difference honestly. When you do a snapshot, all that happens is that LVM writes any future changes to another location.
And you still can not do rollbacks, that is turns a dataset to a previous snapshot. It is like when a dataset is rolled back, all data that has changed since the snapshot is discarded, and the dataset reverts to the state at the time of the snapshot. This is not what you have on LVM...
I wrote a bash script that can mount previous snapshots (without effecting the system), check information on a file/folder's sizes and offer me an option to copy any of them over the existing files. The script is 45 lines, majority of those lines are comments.
You also can not do a writable volume or file system whose initial contents are the same as another dataset or clones.
Eh? You mean replicating data so it's identical on two volumes like RAID would and using it live? LVM can do that.
Not so easy as it would be with ZFS, is it?:)
ZFS breaks some traditional file system models, which is why I am not very keen on it. That said, ZFS does provide a few tools out of the box, which I would have to script on LVM to get the equivalent action. Unfortunately, my own experience with ZFS is rather limited to getting annoyed with how devices would not work with the rest of the ZFS unless I did extensive poking. Thus if I wasn't around to poke at the machine, the pool would always say it was "degraded" - This very quickly lead to me getting fedup with the OS in general.
its scheduler doesn't suck, its stable and usable under extreme load
It's sort of true... Solaris isn't that snappy to begin with, but it doesn't get bogged down easily either. It says at a pretty consistent speed from my experience.
and it has a stable ABI.
Amusingly, this hasn't really helped the hardware support much for Solaris, when you compare all the hardware Linux supports with it's unstable ABIs.
(eg, dtrace vs kerneltrap)
Which, is great if you're doing kernel development - it really is. But if you're not doing kernel development - Not much use in that.
and is more true to the traditional UNIX way of doing things, like FreeBSD.
Yes, like. Not using initd for daemons but using some assine svcadm thing that uses XML files for that pure basic Unix roo.. Wait what?
if you're from a unix background
I come from a unixish background and I have to say, the way Solaris just kind of stunted in growth the past decade in the userland itself. As an example, take the system utilities. Compared to GNU is getting pathetic. GNU's toolchain doesn't exactly have that many changes over the years, but when Solaris lacks features like compression in tar, less defined regular expressions in grep, crontab not supporting options like */2, @reboot etc. It makes it look quite backwards.
On top of that, the reliance on starting giant java runtimes to just display simple configuration utilities that take forever to load for this reason just seems a bit assine.
linux probably pisses you off in many ways due to the "different for no good reason" stuff everywhere...
This is really no different from the BSDs, the different Solaris-based distributions.
That said, unlike older Unix admins, I have a tendency to actually learn the reason why things are done differently. I find the philosophies of different Unix, BSD, Linux systems quite fascinating.
You know -- if I wanted to promote Solaris, I'd discuss the less known features like containers or zones and just to what extent they can be used, setup to do etc.
Show me how to roll-back your newly upgraded Debian, once you find it is screwed up and some software won't work properly anymore (we all know it happens sometimes, even you've tested in prior on clean environment).
lvremove/dev/server1/current.1252985968
That would remove any changes to the partition since Tue Sep 15 04:39:28 2009 on my servers.
Show me self-healing of your Linux.
I use heartbeat setups with multiple boxes, rather than a single mainframe. Hardware issue, a redundant server can take over while that server is taken offline to be diagnosed and repaired. This is a lot better than having a single server which, even with it's all it's redundancy systems, can still fail in ways that make it difficult to restore to normal operations in less than a minute.
Cheaper too, no specialized hardware etc. Plus there is no need to deal with that Predictive Self-Healing crap that bugs out because the OS doesn't support certain hardware (despite there being official sources saying it does) properly.
One thing I thing the Linux community could take from OpenSolaris is its concentration on the approval and standardization of applications, so long as you stay on the OpenSolaris repositories. There is pretty much one tool for each job. That's it -- generally speaking of course.
As a quick example off the top of my head, I'll take GNU's tar, cron (Solaris' doesn't even have */5 or @reboot), grep over Solaris' default equivalents. From my own experience, I don't find this "standardization" allowing much room for any kind of innovation.
It may not have all the bells/whistles of Ubuntu
The utilities don't even have the past decade of enhancements we've seen on BSDs and Linux, never mind Ubuntu.
hitslink.com is extremely inaccurate, it gathers statistics from sites like Roche, Forbes, Vodafone US, Nokia US, CNN, Alexa, New York Times etc.
If you don't see a problem with this, these are mostly websites that are really only visited by US people. For it to be a accurate international representation, it would need to have some popular sites from every country. Such as in Poland it's o2.pl, wp.pl, kuszotv.pl etc.
For one thing, I used to manage a extremely heavily used website in Poland, and the OS X statistics were far smaller (in fact, it was so small, it was displayed at 0%). While Linux was reaching something around 16-18% in statistics. These are really significant differences which is why I don't think that site is even close to being accurate if it doesn't have some popular sites which are generally only popular to certain countries.
And if you don't like the interface, you can use the built in theme support to make it look like another player you do prefer.
Do I even need to comment? I mean can this guy be serious!?
What, you don't know how to choose a theme from a drop down list like you can in WMP's preferences or Winamp's preferences? Feature parity and even UI parity right there to commercial applications.
I don't see how it's shit, you get the most used buttons people would want, play, stop, pause, next, previous, fullscreen. A easy to use volume control bar and seek bar. A option to use a playlist, equalizer and it's all intergrated with the player window that is completely dynamically resizeable. Then providing a lot more advanced features in a drop down menu which other players don't have. And if you don't like the interface, you can use the built in theme support to make it look like another player you do prefer.
Sorry, I don't buy your bullshit.
To play/pause I have to hit Cmd-P. At first, I thought my spacebar was broken.
You don't have to, you have the option to change the hot keys if you really don't like that. Spacebar works fine in VLC for Windows and Linux, so it's a Mac only thing, and you should be used to that, considering Macs have often significantly different UI conventions to everything else.
I think it is more than just technical writers not donating time, I think it is people not donating time to areas that are tedious and boring or provide little 'reward'.
Reminds me of any sort of programming I do. I've seen artists that designed interface icons in an hour get credit to the point that it seemed they were the ones that actually made the application useful to everyone, not the programmers that spend far more tedious hours on it.
Same behaviour here, Firefox on Ubuntu regularly crashes, although I rarely have under 8 browsers open, and rarely under 50 tabs in total. Firefox memory usage averages around 1.3GB for me, although after a restart that drops down to around 250MB with the same number of pages open.
I will admit, Firefox here takes a tonne of memory, often maxing out the 32bit memory allocation for itself. But, with the huge amount of pages I leave open and crappy flash things, I'm not surprised and have yet to find a browser that handled this better.
Then you are not Linux or Firefox knowledgeable and a fanboy of one or the other.
Honestly, it doesn't happen on my systems, the only times I've ever really seen Firefox crash for other people is over the flash plugin being retarded, conflicting extensions and messed up user profiles.
On Ubuntu, prior to v9 of Ubuntu, default installs, Firefox crashed more than IE6 on my SP2 XP Home setup with similar number of windows running. Firefox bombed on me most after 40 open windows (I typically used to use around 60-75). I reboot Ubuntu about once a month, mainly because I want to not because I have to, and Firefox used to bomb at least 5-6x between reboots.
I run Kubuntu. I think the only time Firefox took a dump on me on my latest install was due to a replicable crashing issue in VLC's plugin, which crashed every browser - It was easilly remedied by replacing the plugin with another. The Firefox application itself however has not been responsible for the majority of FF crashes I've had over the years, and I have had only a few.
How many you got? On the earlier versions, I could use Firefox with under 20 windows and not have it crash. Push 30, and it stalls and crashes somewhat. More, see above.
With my window that has a tonne of Furaffinity pages, I would say definitely over a hundred, I don't want to even count that Window because it would take forever. I'd say about 20 to 40 in other Windows.
It doesn't crash, but admittedly it is a bit sluggish, but then again, any browser would be sluggish with this amount (Opera - due to it's weird plugin issues, Konqueror would have easily crashed on me by now).
Ahh, yes, blame the user. Blame the hardware. Blame the install. Don't look at forums. Don't look at user complaints. You probably have some newer hardware with ridiculous loads of memory.
Oh, I do. If you did the minimum amount of research on me, you would have found that I regulary help out on #Firefox on Mozilla's IRC network (and you would find, I also help out in loads of other projects, including support on Windows). I have plenty of experience in helping issues with Firefox and the cause is often, corrupted profiles, bad extensions, plugins being foobared when it comes to crashes. Less often, it's actually OS and hardware issues.
I counted 43 youtube tabs open in my current session.
It will lock up firefox for me pretty regularly
Doesn't for me, although I have in the past had great problems with Flash in general - Although they went away within the recent year of OS+software installs.
and closing it makes the window disappear but doesn't stop it. When you run again it says "firefox is already running but is not responding..."
I have that issue for like a minute, but I assume that's because I have so many tabs and windows open and I see constant HD activity (so I assume it's dumping the SQL lite database to disk), once the HD usage has stopped the process has gone and I can launch Firefox again normally.
Slashdot Mirror
If you want to bash Apple, do it right. OS X is not based on any m68k code. You could discuss about how OS X has poor POSIX compatibility (even though it has a Unix license - Just like Windows does with it's POSIX subsystem). You could talk about how the OpenGL support being broken, badly made drivers, hardware issues that to this day have not been resolved - including too much thermal paste on the processor or badly done soldering on their "logic boards".
But "latency-enhanced version of an operating system first sold on 68k machines"? That is complete rubbish.
I've let them know that I think Apple should be able to do what they want with their platform.
On the installations I've had, not a single one had GNU utilities as default. GNU ulities were named things like ggrep in the default path. If you wanted to make them default you had to override the path settings for /usr/gnu/bin/ over /usr/bin.
You must be new here.
What the crap? What is so different about GNU's crontab and Solaris's crontab for binary compatability? Why can't they update Solaris's crontab to have these features? ...
There was a reason why I chose my wording ("default") carefully. One of the first things I do with a Solaris installation is set /usr/gnu/bin/ as a primary path over /usr/bin, because I cannot stand the fact that they can't add support for more features into their existing utilities to the point that everything from compression in tar and recursive grepping (why can't get they add a -r switch? Seriously, why? Why would binary compatibility stop this?).
I was speaking more specifically about userland. Kernel wise, Solaris has had a few enhancements over the years. Although comparing brandz, zones, containers - There are equilivant Linux technologies that exist to those already which is not bringing that much of a difference to Linux users who are in the know.
ZFS, it seems like a good technology, but my own experiences with it was getting annoyed at the OS constantly because it didn't support devices that in theory (according to hardware support on the website), should have been supported correctly so it was constantly running in a degraded state. Which, lead to some rather strange problems with data that I couldn't resolve (despite it being promoted as some kind of extremely fault tolerant system).
I'm platform agnostic, I think pretty much all x86 operating systems suck. I have gripes with all of them. The number one method to start me ranting on Linux is to bring up the sound system - Something that Solaris (where hardware is supported) does far better currently.
I was pretending to be one of those Unix administrators that don't like anything different and want a pure original Unix model in that response - As the original poster said:
---
Not that RAM makes much of a difference at starting the runtime. I mean, it's not like I'm using it on a system with less than 4GB of RAM to begin with. I don't think the differences between 4GB RAM (which is mostly unused) and 8GB are really going to effect the start up performance of java application by that much.
C++ doesn't randomly decide to take 15 seconds (I don't really care about what is to blame as much as the fact it just is) to start what seems to be a very simple application to begin with.
Nope. They used some proprietary thing that was loosely based on the BSD-licensed TCP/IP stack.
I stopped doing development on OS X when having to deal with buggy graphics drivers and OpenGL being broken, this was before dtrace was available on the OS. So you have me at a disadvantage there.
I have only ever used dtrace on Solaris and did not really find a very practical use for it outside of kernel development. For general userland applications, it's not very useful.
Such as?
Can I get a comparison with something?
If this is that tried argument on different Linux distributions, where by they are reinventing things or doing different things on different distributions - This is no different from the BSDs, Unix systems and hell, even going more specific, the Solaris-based distributions.
Second life is not a game, it's a virtual world. It also has quite a few large companies inside it who have established their own presence, not withstanding IBM, AMD, Intel, ATi etc. But hey, someone asks me to name an enterprise, I'll name one. If you want to make another one, more serious about money - New York Stock Exchange also uses Debian (along with other Linux distros too) with HP's support contracts.
I am a different poster from before. :)
I do recall a rather sad story of how they got MySQL devs to come in and help them deal with load issues, devs came in, took a look at how much traffic was going through to MySQL, threw their hands up and left. Linden lab have been trying hard to solve their database load issues on their own ever since.
I do snapshots online. There is a small problem people who are less experienced with LVM encounter a problem where by the partition to goes read only for a moment.
True, but this doesn't really bother me. I have snapshots taken every hour, at the end of the week the snapshots are backed up to a secondary server and hourly snapshots are merged into daily snapshots after two weeks, after two months they're merged into monthly snapshots.
I could leave them as daily snapshots, but I have never needed to get so specific on time after all that time.
Perhaps, never really noticed that much of a significant difference honestly. When you do a snapshot, all that happens is that LVM writes any future changes to another location.
I wrote a bash script that can mount previous snapshots (without effecting the system), check information on a file/folder's sizes and offer me an option to copy any of them over the existing files. The script is 45 lines, majority of those lines are comments.
Eh? You mean replicating data so it's identical on two volumes like RAID would and using it live? LVM can do that.
ZFS breaks some traditional file system models, which is why I am not very keen on it. That said, ZFS does provide a few tools out of the box, which I would have to script on LVM to get the equivalent action. Unfortunately, my own experience with ZFS is rather limited to getting annoyed with how devices would not work with the rest of the ZFS unless I did extensive poking. Thus if I wasn't around to poke at the machine, the pool would always say it was "degraded" - This very quickly lead to me getting fedup with the OS in general.
It's sort of true... Solaris isn't that snappy to begin with, but it doesn't get bogged down easily either. It says at a pretty consistent speed from my experience.
Amusingly, this hasn't really helped the hardware support much for Solaris, when you compare all the hardware Linux supports with it's unstable ABIs.
Which, is great if you're doing kernel development - it really is. But if you're not doing kernel development - Not much use in that.
Yes, like. Not using initd for daemons but using some assine svcadm thing that uses XML files for that pure basic Unix roo.. Wait what?
I come from a unixish background and I have to say, the way Solaris just kind of stunted in growth the past decade in the userland itself. As an example, take the system utilities. Compared to GNU is getting pathetic. GNU's toolchain doesn't exactly have that many changes over the years, but when Solaris lacks features like compression in tar, less defined regular expressions in grep, crontab not supporting options like */2, @reboot etc. It makes it look quite backwards.
On top of that, the reliance on starting giant java runtimes to just display simple configuration utilities that take forever to load for this reason just seems a bit assine.
This is really no different from the BSDs, the different Solaris-based distributions.
That said, unlike older Unix admins, I have a tendency to actually learn the reason why things are done differently. I find the philosophies of different Unix, BSD, Linux systems quite fascinating.
You know -- if I wanted to promote Solaris, I'd discuss the less known features like containers or zones and just to what extent they can be used, setup to do etc.
Linden lab.
lvremove /dev/server1/current.1252985968
That would remove any changes to the partition since Tue Sep 15 04:39:28 2009 on my servers.
I use heartbeat setups with multiple boxes, rather than a single mainframe. Hardware issue, a redundant server can take over while that server is taken offline to be diagnosed and repaired. This is a lot better than having a single server which, even with it's all it's redundancy systems, can still fail in ways that make it difficult to restore to normal operations in less than a minute.
Cheaper too, no specialized hardware etc. Plus there is no need to deal with that Predictive Self-Healing crap that bugs out because the OS doesn't support certain hardware (despite there being official sources saying it does) properly.
As a quick example off the top of my head, I'll take GNU's tar, cron (Solaris' doesn't even have */5 or @reboot), grep over Solaris' default equivalents. From my own experience, I don't find this "standardization" allowing much room for any kind of innovation.
The utilities don't even have the past decade of enhancements we've seen on BSDs and Linux, never mind Ubuntu.
hitslink.com is extremely inaccurate, it gathers statistics from sites like Roche, Forbes, Vodafone US, Nokia US, CNN, Alexa, New York Times etc.
If you don't see a problem with this, these are mostly websites that are really only visited by US people. For it to be a accurate international representation, it would need to have some popular sites from every country. Such as in Poland it's o2.pl, wp.pl, kuszotv.pl etc.
For one thing, I used to manage a extremely heavily used website in Poland, and the OS X statistics were far smaller (in fact, it was so small, it was displayed at 0%). While Linux was reaching something around 16-18% in statistics. These are really significant differences which is why I don't think that site is even close to being accurate if it doesn't have some popular sites which are generally only popular to certain countries.
The people who believe that this is a opensource software only issue.
That's the only feature lacking? I don't think the Gimp is that far behind then.
I'm not arguing about PS3's demise, only the rubbish that it's "ahead of it's time".
What, you don't know how to choose a theme from a drop down list like you can in WMP's preferences or Winamp's preferences? Feature parity and even UI parity right there to commercial applications.
Sorry, I don't buy your bullshit still.
If you actually read my post, it doesn't.
It does.
The OS does that.
I don't want it to use more than 2.5GB. Quite happy with it's current behaviour honestly.
Firefox doesn't corrupt it's profile directories, bad extensions, anti-virus software, operating systems, loss of power does.
I can corrupt Opera's profiles, and IE's user settings to crash them. Why have a different stance with Firefox?
I don't see how it's shit, you get the most used buttons people would want, play, stop, pause, next, previous, fullscreen. A easy to use volume control bar and seek bar. A option to use a playlist, equalizer and it's all intergrated with the player window that is completely dynamically resizeable. Then providing a lot more advanced features in a drop down menu which other players don't have. And if you don't like the interface, you can use the built in theme support to make it look like another player you do prefer.
Sorry, I don't buy your bullshit.
You don't have to, you have the option to change the hot keys if you really don't like that. Spacebar works fine in VLC for Windows and Linux, so it's a Mac only thing, and you should be used to that, considering Macs have often significantly different UI conventions to everything else.
Reminds me of any sort of programming I do. I've seen artists that designed interface icons in an hour get credit to the point that it seemed they were the ones that actually made the application useful to everyone, not the programmers that spend far more tedious hours on it.
To be honest, I disagree with your assessment.
I will admit, Firefox here takes a tonne of memory, often maxing out the 32bit memory allocation for itself. But, with the huge amount of pages I leave open and crappy flash things, I'm not surprised and have yet to find a browser that handled this better.
Honestly, it doesn't happen on my systems, the only times I've ever really seen Firefox crash for other people is over the flash plugin being retarded, conflicting extensions and messed up user profiles.
I run Kubuntu. I think the only time Firefox took a dump on me on my latest install was due to a replicable crashing issue in VLC's plugin, which crashed every browser - It was easilly remedied by replacing the plugin with another. The Firefox application itself however has not been responsible for the majority of FF crashes I've had over the years, and I have had only a few.
With my window that has a tonne of Furaffinity pages, I would say definitely over a hundred, I don't want to even count that Window because it would take forever. I'd say about 20 to 40 in other Windows.
It doesn't crash, but admittedly it is a bit sluggish, but then again, any browser would be sluggish with this amount (Opera - due to it's weird plugin issues, Konqueror would have easily crashed on me by now).
Oh, I do. If you did the minimum amount of research on me, you would have found that I regulary help out on #Firefox on Mozilla's IRC network (and you would find, I also help out in loads of other projects, including support on Windows). I have plenty of experience in helping issues with Firefox and the cause is often, corrupted profiles, bad extensions, plugins being foobared when it comes to crashes. Less often, it's actually OS and hardware issues.
I counted 43 youtube tabs open in my current session.
Doesn't for me, although I have in the past had great problems with Flash in general - Although they went away within the recent year of OS+software installs.
I have that issue for like a minute, but I assume that's because I have so many tabs and windows open and I see constant HD activity (so I assume it's dumping the SQL lite database to disk), once the HD usage has stopped the process has gone and I can launch Firefox again normally.