only badly written programs crash (it's sad but true that many programs are released with errors in them, that could have been avoided if the programmers wrote the code properly and if the testing phase was long and intense enough)
Not neccesarily. There is always a bad chip or two per bag, but that doesn't mean the brand is bad. Some things just slip through both development and testing.
However, it is true that a program which has many many more bugs than comparable programs is often badly done. One prominent example was Windows ME.
One app for all sounds good but the problem would be it would be just overhelming to see like 15 tabs (and imagine the endless searching and switching of tabs...) I would prefer an editor without tabs, but with little icons that start up several dialogs or tools, that can be independent from the main editor,
Yes, if done badly it would be very difficult to use. We would have to design it carefully.
but are also used with a fluid workflow from the editor to the tool. Like you have a pawn selected and then click onto the icon for the ScriptEditor, it will automaticly load the script file of that pawn and open the ScriptEditor. Or you can click onto an icon that fires up a terrain edtior (you have a heightmap right and an wireframe left) and then in that terrain editor you have a fluid workflow back to the main editor - like you click onto a button 'add terrain to level' and it is then added to the level.
Excellent idea! That's definitly easily doable, even with separate programs, without resorting to ugly hacks - I was experimenting with programs talking to each other a few weeks ago (for RF2-ScriptEditor interaction, like marking errors that occured during runtime in RF2 in the ScriptEditor window, etc.)