Support NeoGAF

[Oregano]

I've had this debate in the past, and that's not true at all. Soft makes money, not hardware.

Take a simple exemple. Mario kart.

In proposition A, there is a WiiU, MK8 sells way less than the 7th.
Proposition b, no WiiU, MK8 is released on 3ds after MK7. it sells more, cause the park is bigger, more money to make.

You gonna tell me "but on 3ds they already had one so it wouldn't sell" which is super wrong. Cause there is one and only Nintendo fanbase, and Mario Kart fan base, not one on console and one on portable, and the rare people who will tell me "oh i'm a big fan of nitnendo but i never play their game on portable" well.. are have a weird appreciation of nintendo's game to begin with..

I disagree with this somewhat. I imagine the plan will be one core release and then more expansions/DLC and also allow the teams to explore other franchises and work on new stuff.

I still think they will share libraries though.

Spoiler

Or at least they probably should.

 

[Roo]

Because of the reasons listed in the post... the most noteworthy of which is the fact that Nintendo is already developing for Android/iOS.

What the hell does that have to do with their own OS?
Sony has developed games for Android too, should PS5 have Android running as the main OS? please..

 

[Roberto Larcos]

Great! Then let's discuss those points, rather than critiquing the OP's presentation style.

I can't find a post about stability. But Android is better-supported than Nintendo's own OSes ever will be, so I think we can agree that Android as a starting point is much better than 0.

As for piracy, Nintendo has a lot of experience in this area. Rather than spending 3 - 5 years building their own OS and a fraction of that on security, they can fork Android and spend 3 - 5 years (or far less) on security. You can also build security into the hardware, although with digital becoming the norm, it is much less effective.

To get the most out of performance, Nintendo can optimise their fork. If we're going to talk about performance, perhaps we should look at Wii U and its horrendous performance.

"Doesn't follow historical trends" and "Loss of control" doesn't mean anything anymore. Nintendo is now developing for other platforms, didn't you hear?

In terms of good quality games (the business Nintendo's in), Android is absolutely not better supported than Nintendo's own platforms.

They can spend a decade on security, Android will still be a mess as far as security goes. If it was as easy as you insinuate (time + money), that nut would be cracked right now. As it stands, BlackBerry and iOS dominate enterprise / government for a reason. Samsung has poured millions into trying to make Android more secure, and they're having problems.

Wii U has horrendous performance? Not really, but if you were to argue that, it definitely isn't because of software. Look at Bayonetta 2. For the hardware, that game is ridiculous. The hardware is the limiting factor. NX will fix that.

As for historical context, you've missed the wood for the trees. Nintendo has demonstrated now a willingness to dip their fingers into others' pies. They will have no will to give Google a share of theirs.

 

[Nafai1123]

Does it?

The fact something uses technologies based on an established os ecosystem does not make it a specimen of the ecosystem.

Unless you insist OSX is also some form of BSD.

It runs Orbis OS, a modified version of FreeBSD. Nintendo could do something similar with Android.

 

[Nintendojitsu]

This ability to misconstrue what one person says as the complete opposite must be a latent superpower by a choice few.

 

[NeOak]

It runs Orbis OS, a modified version of FreeBSD. Nintendo could do something similar with Android.

Not with Android. It will never be as secure as FreeBSD.

 

[diablos991]

Great! Then let's discuss those points, rather than critiquing the OP's presentation style.

1. I can't find a post about stability. But Android is better-supported than Nintendo's own OSes ever will be, so I think we can agree that Android as a starting point is much better than 0.

2. As for piracy, Nintendo has a lot of experience in this area. Rather than spending 3 - 5 years building their own OS and a fraction of that on security, they can fork Android and spend 3 - 5 years (or far less) on security. You can also build security into the hardware, although with digital becoming the norm, it is much less effective.

3. To get the most out of performance, Nintendo can optimise their fork. If we're going to talk about performance, perhaps we should look at Wii U and its horrendous performance.

4. "Doesn't follow historical trends" and "Loss of control" doesn't mean anything anymore. Nintendo is now developing for other platforms, didn't you hear?

1. What makes you think Android is more stable than Nintendo's existing OS? Do you have evidence such as crash report logs or system resource usage? If not, that is once again speculation. Better supported is a relative term. Android is better supported at Google, while Nintendo's OS is better supported at Nintendo. I think we can both agree that Nintendo is better at supporting Nintendo's OS than Android.

2. Piracy will always be a problem. It is naïve to think basing an OS on open sourced code is more resistant to piracy than basing something off of proprietary code which is protected by intellectual property rights. There are many ways to slay this cat and I have no doubt Nintendo will do it regardless of which OS they choose.

3. While Nintendo's OS isn't known for performance, at least it is something they can control. If Nintendo uses Android they lose a level of control over that performance. Nintendo is unlikely to give up the control incase it causes a problem Nintendo will rely on Google to fix when Google's attention will obviously be focused on their vanilla distribution.

4. I don't believe you understand what loss of control means here. It means losing the ability to make strategic business decisions regarding the OS because, at its base, is controlled by a different company. Much like outsourcing, the decision is not to be made lightly because it is much more expensive to get the ability to create an OS back after it has been lost by using another company's product as a crutch.

 

[Roberto Larcos]

C'mon guys.

Maybe just incredibly misinformed?

 

[catmario]

Going Android OS = Never ending piracy war

 

[Oregano]

I believe Aquamarine broke the data down many times before on why a hybrid would be difficult because their hardware makes up nearly half their profits.

I don't think we're talking about a hybrid. We're talking about two systems sharing the same library. It's definitely possible in this day and age and Nintendo working on mobile stuff will means they will already be aiming at a range of power for game development.

 

[Nafai1123]

Not with Android. It will never be as secure as FreeBSD.

I'm curious, why not?

 

[Nanashrew]

Great! Then let's discuss those points, rather than critiquing the OP's presentation style.

I can't find a post about stability. But Android is better-supported than Nintendo's own OSes ever will be, so I think we can agree that Android as a starting point is much better than 0.

As for piracy, Nintendo has a lot of experience in this area. Rather than spending 3 - 5 years building their own OS and a fraction of that on security, they can fork Android and spend 3 - 5 years (or far less) on security. You can also build security into the hardware, although with digital becoming the norm, it is much less effective.

To get the most out of performance, Nintendo can optimise their fork. If we're going to talk about performance, perhaps we should look at Wii U and its horrendous performance.

"Doesn't follow historical trends" and "Loss of control" doesn't mean anything anymore. Nintendo is now developing for other platforms, didn't you hear?

I don't think Nintendo will want to pay royalties. They'll stick to making their own operating systems and keeping themselves secure.

 

[Tadaima]

Like they're already being pretty radical historically by making smartphone games as it is. Now all their games are gonna become mobile-compatible. You think they're just gonna jump off the dead end.

Forking Android and using it as the basis for their OS does not = mobile compatible. It does mean that they can enrich their core platforms with their Android efforts, though. And that their titles are much easier to port in the event that their core businesses continues its decline.

Consider it, among its other benefits, a very conservative and precautional measure, which fits with the way Nintendo operates its business.

 

[NeOak]

I'm curious, why not?

https://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-13/dc13-presentations/DC_13-Potter.pdf

Remember that Android uses the Linux kernel.

 

[Toadthemushroom]

Nintendo have very little reason to adopt Android, and I think this article does a good job of loosely explaining most of the reasons why (granted, it's about traditional OEMs but you can see some parallels with what Nintendo would want to do with it). http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013...ntrolling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/

Nintendo thrives on being able to control the hardware and software experience as one. Adopting Android would mean Nintendo loses this control.

 

[Silent Chief]

Nintendo platforms should be like those two examples. (Android and iOS)

Should doesn't mean they will be.

This could mean different things.

1. Compatibility across console and handheld.

2. Compatibility across several handheld versions. Maybe a phone, Maybe even third party hardware.

3. Compatibility across several generations of handheld/console. (Like PC basically.) Handheld keep getting more powerful, but they use the same ABI and cartridge so everything from now on is backward compatible and Nintendo releases more powerful hardware every 2 years.

 

[blu]

It runs Orbis OS, a modified version of FreeBSD. Nintendo could do something similar with Android.

Sure, for some definition of 'modified'.

/shakes head

 

[zrubenmtz]

sorry to "backseat mod", but... can a mod change the title of the thread or something?...

I bet a lot of people like me are falling for the "clickbait-ish" thread title.

 

[Resilient]

Lmfao I found this hilarious.

OP you did yourselves no favours with that title. You should have said "in my opinion..." And gone from there. Now look what happened.

On topic, nah. I don't think Nintendo would expose the ecosystem they've spent decades building to the OS anarchy that is Android.

 

[NeOak]

Forking Android and using it as the basis for their OS does not = mobile compatible. It does mean that they can enrich their core platforms with their Android efforts, though. And that their titles are much easier to port in the event that their core businesses continues its decline.

Consider it, among its other benefits, a very conservative and precautional measure, which fits with the way Nintendo operates its business.

LOL no.

Stop pushing an insecure OS with bullshit about SDKs that you do not understand as to why you are right.

 

[Projectjustice]

Yea, hmmm thats a no.

 

[mothball]

I've never seen an Android device without terrible audio and input latency. No thanks.

 

[Fox_Mulder]

OP seems legit to me.

 

[Darryl]

Forking Android and using it as the basis for their OS does not = mobile compatible. It does mean that they can enrich their core platforms with their Android efforts, though. And that their titles are much easier to port in the event that their core businesses continues its decline.

Consider it, among its other benefits, a very conservative and precautional measure, which fits with the way Nintendo operates its business.

Port to what tho? The escape plan for that doomsday scenario would be porting to mobile, the place Android is used

 

[dracula_x]

Android is awful OS for a gaming-dedicated device, especially for Nintendo, and there're many reasons why – performance, lag, not secure, etc.

 

[pinkurocket]

That topic title... :I
I don't see it happening. I'm thinking their mobile endeavours will be separate from the ecosystem they're creating for their dedicated gaming devices. Even though DeNa is working on both according to what I understood.

 

[maquiladora]

Going Android OS = Never ending piracy war

Who's to say it won't be something like Shield (runs on Android) with no physical media and all games streamed like PS Now? Or something else we can't even imagine yet. This is a whole new platform that wont be released for probably 2+ years, it could be very different from what we think of as a standard platform today.

 

[Nafai1123]

Sure, for some definition of 'modified'.

/shakes head

No need for the snark, I'm merely referring to this article that came out from leaked devkit photos.

After selecting Orbis OS, a modified version of FreeBSD with a bunch of PS4-specific libraries appears to load.

https://www.defcon.org/images/defcon-13/dc13-presentations/DC_13-Potter.pdf

Remember that Android uses the Linux kernel.

Interesting. Thanks for the info.

 

[NeOak]

Who's to say it won't be something like Shield (runs on Android) with no physical media and all games streamed like PS Now? Or something else we can't even imagine yet. This is a whole new platform that wont be released for probably 2+ years, it could be very different from what we think of as a standard platform today.

Android as an OS is not secure.

No physical media? lol no.

 

[Clefargle]

How powerful would the next Nintendo console have to be to emulate all the nintendo catalog with the exception of the Wii U? would it be prohibitively expensive?

 

[fredrancour]

So far, all I see is:
1. People laughing at the idea;
2. People pointing to piracy as the only reason Android will not be adopted.

Adoption of Android does not = piracy. As has been mentioned, it can be locked down. Nintendo is getting much better at that.

I listed off six good reasons why Android makes business sense for Nintendo. I am yet to see a reason why it does not.

To points 3 and 4: Iwata talked about not porting games designed for dedicated hardware to mobile. Therefore, they are unlikely to make their OS decisions based on ways to perform that task, and if they think they can better serve their dedicated hardware needs with a proprietary system.

To point 2: In addition to the previous thing I said, which I feel still applies, I feel that a console more open to low-effort 3rd-party ports from other consoles or PCs would be far better for broadening the system's appeal than easy ports of android software. Even getting only half of the 3rd-party releases the other consoles get would still be a start to fix the negative perception of their hardware among many core gamers.

To point 6: Third-party app support provided by android access would do nothing to help sell Nintendo hardware. As I said before, if 3rd-party ports are a concern, there's more value in getting the easiest possible third-party ports of conventional games.

To Point 5: I feel that the efforts to create whatever new things Nintendo needs for multi-platform infrastructure are already substantial enough with or without the opportunity to reuse Android-based apps that they won't make an OS decision just for the purpose of reusing said app. I don't know nearly enough about software development to say something definitive though.

Actually, I feel like points 3 and 6 render point 2 redundant. What "additional content" were you envisioning under point 2 that isn't covered under internal cross-platform porting in three or 3rd-party content in 6?

Meanwhile, point 1 is only relevant if the other points have already convinced one of Android's merit.

Also, I believe the ARM stuff was still at least partially rumors? The handhelds have always used ARM, of course, but I thought all the ARM chip rumors we had were attached to unspecified hardware products?

 

[Snakeyes]

It's sad to see all that philosophy of modern strategy and global os etc in the OP.. and still making the horrible and useless mistake of having TWO dedicated gaming system.

It's funny cause gamers are all about Nintendo modernization nowadays but they still can't go beyond that conservative idea that Nintendo needs two systems, one being for the tv.

The day Nintendo realize they only need their portable, it'll be a great success for them.

Nah dude. I've already typed up a lengthy response to one of your hybrid posts a while back so I'll just quote it below.

1. The average consumer just doesn't want to constantly fiddle with bullshit like docks or HDMI outs. You can see this based on how quickly sales of iPod/iPhone media docks have dropped in favor of wireless solutions. Heat, battery and latency issues also make streaming less practical for a game console.

2. When it comes to dedicated gaming devices, people generally don't like paying for features they don't see themselves using. The Xbox One's sales improved noticeably after Microsoft started offering a bundle without Kinect. There are posters on this very board who refuse to buy a Wii U unless Nintendo offers a Gamepad-less SKU.

The same could happen with a handheld-console hybrid; handheld-centric consumers will see the console features as a waste of money and vice-versa. There's a very real risk of alienating a sizable chunk of both markets, especially since...

3. A hybrid device will always end up more expensive than either form factor, because it will need to house specific components to function well as both a handheld and home console. A home console that can double as a handheld will need a decent display, a battery pack and low-power mobile hardware. A handheld that doubles a home console will need to be bundled with at least one traditional controller, hardware that supports 4+ player MP at home and most importantly, a processor that can be overclocked to handle the higher quality graphics that are usually expected from a home console, or some kind of dock that boosts the handheld's capabilities.

In both cases, the cost of those extra components could instead be put towards making two (or more) separate devices that are more attractive for their respective markets. Remove the home console parts from the hybrid and you can sell a much more affordable handheld - low prices were always key to Nintendo's past successes in the handheld market. Remove the handheld parts from the hybrid and you can either put their cost towards building a much more powerful home console or, again, sell it cheaper.

Even if you're interested in both the portable and home experience, why would you want to drop $250-300 on a handheld that doubles as a sub-par console instead of spending slightly more ($300-400 tops) on a handheld and a console that's more powerful than what a hybrid would have been? Even the most powerful hybrid they could put together within the next three years would be well behind a new Nintendo console that's nearly a generation behind the PS5/XB2 itself.

4. Even if they diversify their lineup and improve their marketing next time around, Nintendo will still want a piece of the family market. Why does this matter? A handheld is a personal device while a home console usually ends up being shared until the kids get to a certain age.

For any family with two or more children, you'll likely end up with constant bickering over who gets to take the hybrid with them, who gets to play on the TV and a bunch of other crap. Which means that you'll probably need to buy a $250 gaming device for everyone. At that point, many parents would already opt for a hand-me-down or even brand new iPod, smartphone or tablet instead - not only do they offer more functionality than a dedicated gaming device, but two of the three are also cheaper than $250.

In the separate handheld ($150) and home console ($200-250) scenario, buying a handheld for both of your kids and a Nintendo box for the living room would cost you the same, or just slightly more than the price of two hybrids ($500).

5. And finally, if your hybrid is rejected by the market (which is quite likely to happen taking all of the above drawbacks into account), you're pretty much fucked. Having a separate handheld and home console gives you a plan B in case one of the two underperforms and keeps your foot in the door of both markets. A failed hybrid console would turn Nintendo into a non-factor as a handheld and console manufacturer for several years, and make it that much harder to pull off a comeback.

Everything a hybrid console could do, a lineup of Nintendo devices with a shared architecture and software library could do better with less risk of putting their hardware business in jeopardy.

There's no benefit in offering a hybrid device or a handheld with a dock or streaming dongle over a lineup of different devices running the same games unless every single one of them but the handheld repeatedly tank at retail.

 

[Nanashrew]

I don't think we're talking about a hybrid. We're talking about two systems sharing the same library. It's definitely possible in this day and age and Nintendo working on mobile stuff will means they will already be aiming at a range of power for game development.

Well, cross-buy will more than likely be a thing and be on select titles. Smash 5 will more than likely be cross-buy for example, but the library for both systems will try to be unique.

 

[Tadaima]

1. What makes you think Android is more stable than Nintendo's existing OS? Do you have evidence such as crash report logs or system resource usage? If not, that is once again speculation. Better supported is a relative term. Android is better supported at Google, while Nintendo's OS is better supported at Nintendo. I think we can both agree that Nintendo is better at supporting Nintendo's OS than Android.

You made the assertion here. Perhaps you should present crash logs or reports on system resource usage.

Android is open source, and is widely supported for that reason. Nintendo's OS is close-sourced, meaning only Nintendo can support it, which is part of the reason it is so slow-moving in terms of development and extremely bloated.

2. Piracy will always be a problem. It is naïve to think basing an OS on open sourced code is more resistant to piracy than basing something off of proprietary code which is protected by intellectual property rights. There are many ways to slay this cat and I have no doubt Nintendo will do it regardless of which OS they choose.

Nintendo can spend all the time they would otherwise be spending on developing their own OS from the ground-up (a massive endeavour) on integrating their own custom-code into Android. That's a lot of time and resources committed to making their own version of Android a secure and closed environment.

Somebody pointed out that the PS3/4 is based on Linux. And the Xbox One is based on Windows. Linux is the very definition of open source, and Windows has been hacked to hell and back. And yet, PS4 and Xbox One remain unmoved because of the fact that they are extensively customised versions of those environments.

3. While Nintendo's OS isn't known for performance, at least it is something they can control. If Nintendo uses Android they lose a level of control over that performance. Nintendo is unlikely to give up the control incase it causes a problem Nintendo will rely on Google to fix when Google's attention will obviously be focused on their vanilla distribution.

They can fork the repo and get rid of libraries that are unnecessary (since Android is open source), improving performance. But even the heavy version of Android is already much more performant than Nintendo's own OS, so I am not sure what you are getting at here.

4. I don't believe you understand what loss of control means here. It means losing the ability to make strategic business decisions regarding the OS because, at its base, is controlled by a different company. Much like outsourcing, the decision is not to be made lightly because it is much more expensive to get the ability to create an OS back after it has been lost by using another company's product as a crutch.

Again, Android is open source. It is in the public domain. If Google close their core repo and development comes to a standstill, the worst case scenario is the standard case scenario for Nintendo developing their own OS – they're back to being the only developer working on their OS.

 

[Deleted member 125677]

Security issues alone is reason enough that they'll never do this. Then there's performance concerns, latency etc.

But the main reason they won't do it is losing control over their infrastructure. Nintendo has stated several times that they're working on creating a unified system for their next generation handheld and console, and I don't think they're going to ditch that for Android, which is a terrible OS for gaming devices anyway.

 

[VNZ]

Sure, they might do it, but it would be a mistake and not one typical of Nintendo.

Linux at its core is not a realtime OS. Subsystems crucial to latency, like context switching at a bluetooth, network or audio interrupt aren't guaranteed to happen anywhere near as fast as needed to get the response time of the Wii U GamePad. Stacking Android on top of that and you're pretty much screwed, even with the ton of work done by Google et al for the last few releases of Android.

Basically, you can make game systems based on Android but not up to Nintendo's (hitherto) extremely high standards when it comes to core robustness and latency.

 

[Abdul Hafeez]

How powerful would the next Nintendo console have to be to emulate all the nintendo catalog with the exception of the Wii U? would it be prohibitively expensive?

Nope. A $300 machine should be able to emulate everything up to the Wii. Unless you consider $300 prohibitively expensive. The hardware won't be the problem. It's just a matter of writing good emulators, which is very difficult. Although it shouldn't be impossible since who knows Nintendo's hardware better than Nintendo? And if random hobbyist developers can make something as good as Dolphin, then there's no reason Nintendo shouldn't be able to make an even better emulator. Although none of the emulation capabilities will matter if Nintendo only releases 1 game per month.

 

[the thoroughbred]

Imagine if they just made their own smartphone. Now that would be cool,

 

[Nibel]

Well, let's roll the dice then.

 

[Alebrije]

If Nintendo comes with an Android console , pirates will be happy. I hardly see Nintendo going that way.

 

[Nightbird]

Who's to say it won't be something like Shield (runs on Android) with no physical media and all games streamed like PS Now? Or something else we can't even imagine yet. This is a whole new platform that wont be released for probably 2+ years, it could be very different from what we think of as a standard platform today.

Yeah no. Nintendo surley won't go all Digital all of a sudden. Also Android has been always unsecure in terms of piracy because of its Openess. Even if you have an heavily modified OS, Hackers can find out how to crack it no Time due how many Android-Hackers are out there.

I'm sure many would love to see Nintendo going even more Mobile, but let me say this again, As an Company, if your Main Source of income is an Gameconsole, then going with Android as OS, even as Base is Suicide.

 

[Oregano]

Well, cross-buy will more than likely be a thing and be on select titles. Smash 5 will more than likely be cross-buy for example, but the library for both systems will try to be unique.

I think it should(and could) be the default. Throwing money at home console exclusives is a waste of time for Nintendo. If there any exclusives it should be the vast minority.

 

[NeOak]

You made the assertion here. Perhaps you should present crash logs or reports on system resource usage.

You made the OP.

Android is open source, and is widely supported for that reason. Nintendo's OS is close-sourced, meaning only Nintendo can support it, which is part of the reason it is so slow-moving in terms of development and extremely bloated.

Android is supported because: Flash news: It was the only thing that could stand up to Apple and the iPhone OS when the iPhone was released.

Windows is Closed source. Look how fast it moves. Also, you have not fucking idea if you think Android is fast moving.

Nintendo can spend all the time they would otherwise be spending on developing their own OS from the ground-up (a massive endeavour) on integrating their own custom-code into Android. That's a lot of time and resources committed to making their own version of Android a secure and closed environment.

Why? FreeBSD already has all that. Why reinvent the wheel for another *nix variant?

Somebody pointed out that the PS3/4 is based on Linux. And the Xbox One is based on Windows. Linux is the very definition of open source, and Windows has been hacked to hell and back. And yet, PS4 and Xbox One remain unmoved because of the fact that they are extensively customised versions of those environments.

You're ignorant and stubborn.

FreeBSD. And no. Linux has been hacked too. Android even more. Windows has been hacked.

BSD? please link one.

They can fork the repo and get rid of libraries that are unnecessary (since Android is open source), improving performance. But even the heavy version of Android is already much more performant than Nintendo's own OS, so I am not sure what you are getting at here.

You dont even know the difference between an SDK and developing an OS, what do you know?

Again, Android is open source. It is in the public domain. If Google close their core repo and development comes to a standstill, the worst case scenario is the standard case scenario for Nintendo developing their own OS – they're back to being the only developer working on their OS.

Android is not in the public domain. Are you a moron? You do not know even about the GPL or Apache licenses and how the fuck Google controls Android with contracts.

Open source? Better options are.

TL;DR You just keep posting "Tales from my ass" stuff.

 

[RM8]

Who's to say it won't be something like Shield (runs on Android) with no physical media and all games streamed like PS Now? Or something else we can't even imagine yet. This is a whole new platform that wont be released for probably 2+ years, it could be very different from what we think of as a standard platform today.

Are you suggesting Shield is not piracy friendly?

Also, stream-only is something that won't happen soon, especially coming from Nintendo.

 

[666]

“To cite a specific case, Apple is able to release smart devices with various form factors one after another because there is one way of programming adopted by all platforms. Apple has a common platform called iOS,” Iwata stated. “Another example is Android. Though there are various models, Android does not face software shortages because there is one common way of programming on the Android platform that works with various models. Nintendo platforms should be like those two examples.”

This is a bloody exciting thing to hear Iwata say.

 

[Nanashrew]

I think it should(and could) be the default. Throwing money at home console exclusives is a waste of time for Nintendo. If there any exclusives it should be the vast minority.

Then what's the point of having a home console and wanting to make the system brother and sister again through connectivity? There's more to this than just cross-buy in everything Iwata has stated on making this ecosystem.

 

[NeOak]

This is a bloody exciting thing to hear Iwata say.

That means having one set of APIs for all devices. "one way of programming".

It does not mean what the OP speculates about.

 

[666]

I don't think so.

And we still have to see what the infamous QoL is.

It was a distraction to keep investors happy while they worked out their mobile deal. 98% chance you'll never hear of it again.

 

[Oregano]

Then what's the point of having a home console and wanting to make the system brother and sister again through connectivity? There's more to this than just cross-buy in everything Iwata has stated on making this ecosystem.

Because different form factors appeal to different people. Home consoles are in general more popular in the west whilst handhelds are more popular in Japan.

Also if they don't have a shared library then the home console will have almost literally no third party support so it will crater just like Wii U(or worse).

 

[blu]

No need for the snark, I'm merely referring to this article that came out from leaked devkit photos.

I'm aware of the urban legends that circulate the news sites. An actual FreeBSD OS would be able to execute binaries from another similary-versioned and similarly-specced FreeBSD, and vice versa. That means it should have the same set of system libraries, same package system, and last but not least, a compatible kernel.

If you actually pay attention to the second screengrab in that article, it shows 14 DSOs, of which 4 are actually named in accordance to standard bsd (and linux) system libraries. The rest are DSOs unique to the platform the screengrab is from. From that screen alone one could conclude that the system in question is either:
a) a heavily modified linux
b) a heavily modified bsd (there are a myriad of bsd variations, does not need to be exactly freebsd)
c) neither of the above, but something modelled after the *nix elf world.

Anecdote: on my desk in front of me there're two devices right now, which devices use a serious portion of the Android's software stack, but are decisively not Android.