There is precisely zero chance the PS4 will boot anything but a signed boot chain that starts up a hypervisor from which just maybe you can run another OS as long as it pleases Sony to allow you to do so.
The security system of the PS3 was really solid, well at least for a while and then after that whole thing it was fixed and now its very good again.
Do not expect the Xbox 720 or PS4 to be hackable… Economically, piracy was not an issue on the Xbox360 and PS3 whatsoever, even if it was somewhat somehow a little possible.
So obviously no unlicensed stuff D:
There’s very little point to creating unlicensed stuff for a console besides hobby hackery. PC is much better for that.
The whole point of releasing something for PS4 is to use Sony’s ecosystem to drive your sales, imho.
As an aside, I heard this PlayStation Mobile SDK is really quite good and lets you create games for PlayStation Vita (and PS Mobile android devices).
There has been talks that something like that is also coming for PS4.
The catch is that PlayStation Mobile is C#.
So I imagine java on PS4 would at best be possible on a real devkit.
It does seem that PS Vita meaning PS Mobile and Wii U especially support self publishing.
Wii U works with Unity is what I have heard
But the Wii U is a PowerPC and Vita is ARM…
It probably fell a little under the radar because both of there consoles don’t sell well
There are some encouraging stories about indie games on Vita though, for example http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-02-28-retro-city-rampage-sells-best-on-vita-not-so-well-on-xbla
That doesn’t offer anything really beyond what I commented on above on Feb 27th! It’s not that I think it’s simple, it’s that I don’t agree with the conclusion and find the argument confused. In particular there is a conflation of the different patent grants and licences. The Oracle binary licenses are irrelevant to the argument, as is the patent grant in the Java Language Spec (a point made in one of the documents linked to), which is meant to cover 3rd-party TCK compliant implementations not OpenJDK derivatives. The question comes down to whether the GPL, on its own, provides the necessary rights.
For contrary positions you could try searching, for example, on the OpenJDK mailing list (has Sven emailed these arguments there?). This message is interesting - http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/discuss/2010-January/001451.html, and includes a link to a legal assessment of the patent grant in GPLv2.
As I said before, it’s for someone to make their own mind up about (with legal advice if necessary), but I’d be interested in reading anything that has a coherent legal argument against the GPL’s patent grant. I’m not saying a clarified position from Oracle wouldn’t be a good thing, but it doesn’t seem to be stopping people doing interesting things with the OpenJDK source code. ;D
Indeed, Oracle’s binaries may well be covered but any binaries you create by compiling the GPLv2’d source code are explicitly your right to distribute, provided you also provide the source code to anyone who asks, and a copy of the GPLv2 license along with the binaries. It couldn’t really get much more simple than that.
Cas 
To spell out the potential problem I’ve been attempting to describe:
N files with:
<GPL notice here>
...
At least one file with:
<insert some notice incompatiable with GPL here>
...
If you compile and link the above, then cannot distribute the result as you cannot comply with either license. Does this situation exist…no idea…but you’re legal screwed if you don’t find out and it is the case.
well, regarding OpenJDK - which files have incompatible licenses? Anyone know?
Cas
(Should be) None! The IcedTea project helped create a fully open version of OpenJDK. There may be files in the OpenJDK build that have open-source licenses that are theoretically incompatible with the GPLv2 (eg. Apache) - haven’t checked. However, as well as the classpath exception there is the assembly exception http://openjdk.java.net/legal/exception-modules-2007-05-08.html. That should cover both your and Roquen’s concern. Unless Roquen is talking about adding in his own GPL incompatible code to the OpenJDK build itself (as opposed to included stuff by assembly exception or additional libraries covered by classpath exception)?
Incidentally, while reading the OpenJDK FAQ to refresh my memory I noticed this
[quote]Are there any restrictions on what I can do with it?
OpenJDK is released under an well-known open-source licensing model, that places no restrictions on your ability to run OpenJDK.
[/quote]
Emphasis mine. Grammar not! 
How long is a piece of string? How much money does a lawyer need?
When working in the big Teleco’s we went to quite a few legal meetings, some specifically about java, others the GPL (I was contributing to the kernel at the time so i was often asked about the “spirit” of GPL). This was the sun days of course. Long story short. Even on retainer lawyers like hourly rates and take a long time to do anything and for the most part guarantee nothing. They are not real professionals IMO. ie have no liability.
But anyway, its quite clear that generally you can’t be permissive then hold back on a detail. At least in most countries. To take that to court is lots or badness. Mostly because you don’t have good odds of winning. But the final decision is made by a judge. So what is allowed and not allowed can only be worked out in court.
Patents are a different matter at least for software. For the most part if you are not in the US you really shouldn’t care. Lawyers here (EU) have said be careful. But its generally accepted that no court will take the case. At this stage anyway (well about 2 years ago… yes it was real lawyer advice).
It should also be pointed out that Stallman interpretation of derived work is also unlikely to stand up in court. This has been reiterated many times by many lawyers. However most stick to it for PR reasons.
These lawyers are not your lawyers so you know, whatever. But as small time devs you really don’t need to worry. By the time you make enough for anyone to care, you will be pretty rich. Also most courts of the world require that they inform you first and give you a chance to remedy the situation for anything copyright related before proceeding with litigation. Even Patents require pre litigation negations that are fair and reasonable (ie no extortion).
No, I’m talking about the source you’d get from a pull. And again, I’m probably just being paranoid. Really I don’t think it would be unreasonable to spend the time writing a shell script to inspect all files and spew out filenames of any that don’t contain the GPL header and manually inspecting them…as well as a manual review all plain text files before thinking about walking down this path.
Notice the operative word: …on your ability to run… I’ve never claimed that it was possible that it would be illegal for you to “run” the executable you generate. Distribution is my concern.
Then covered by the assembly exception.
No, but that’s what (I read) the page Julien linked to appears to be claiming, specifically around patents. The GPL covers distribution and use.
I’m pretty certain the GPL specifically allows you to distribute and use binaries absolutely gratis. I think that was one of the fundamental reasons for its existence.
Anyway, I’ve hacked on OpenJDK, and even been congratulated on my efforts by Oracle, so bleh.
Cas
Just some numbers…
The PS3 devkit originally cost $10,250. The price was then cut to $2000 in may 2009 so that more developers would come along.
for most poor indie developers it would have to be much lower than that, but we will see… I was just interested in how much money we are talking about. I figured something like $5000 and up, so $2000 isnt all THAT BAD in comparison… well not that I have $2000 to spend on a devkit.
On a related note, the Ouya devkit was like $800, which is freaking crazy. Also considering: Why do you even need it ? Ouya is Android, why do I need such a devkit just for Ouya and then at that price… just give me the Ouya API lib or whatever and there you go
I can see this topic is very populated. I think we should foward it to Oracle to show that we care.
I dont think will help, but,. they should know about us.
we rather thought that the best way is to go for openjdk here ;D
Oracle are fully aware of the contents of this thread.
Cas