From the other side I do think MOS has some better technical lower level implementations compared to OS4 so as the latters use of .so objects.
So how is not supporting .so object better then supporting .so objects?
100% of all AmigaOS librarys are not .so files.
The only .so files you find is the onces ported from Linux. And having .so file support most defiantly helps poring over software like QT, hey if you don't like software that is ported from Linux your free to stick to only MUI and Reaction software, but chances are that even they contain linux libs ".a" files that have been linked into it.
Take mplayer for example do you know way mplayer exe file is so big?
Way is Odyssey Exe file so big?
Is statically linked .a files more or less amiga then sheard objects .so files?
Well its always a good idea to study, have you read the Hyperion blog about this.
http://blog.hyperion-entertainment.biz/?p=481What you should find out is that OS4 Kickstart does not use sheard objects, because its not available until the OS is loaded, shared objects are not "shared" in memory, you should also notice the advice against making shard objects and when creating library for AmigaOS.
So way do we have shard object support? Well because statistic linked .a files make your programs fat, and also exe files that are statistic linked like mplayer for example has every thing built in, so if you wont to replace FFPEG lib in mplayer, you can't but if FFPEG was a .so file or .library file that be possible, so way are not all Linux libs ported as Amiga libraries, well because its a lot of work, and so that never happens.
Simply put "shard object" support is a compromise.
