high198 wrote:I would pay......
I wouldn't pay for bug fixes for any product.
I would not mind to pay for those (MPC) updates. Additional features cost money. You pay for JJ updates (nobody complains) and you pay for new music software versions of (for example) ableton, even if you payed the full price before (nobody complains there as well). This is way better than to complain all the time about not further developed and expensive hardware (which is a reason to complain indeed).
The hardware business model has always had this problem, but there's no reason why it should continue to have it. Release the hardware, then make sure all features are working as they should be with all bugs fixed, then people should have no complaints if an 'optional' but paid OS upgrade is made available. It's the exact same business model as software.
I don't think any reasonable person is going to complain if they are asked to pay extra for features that were never included nor promised when they purchased the unit (although some people just like complaining!).
The key is that all the bugs are fixed and all features originally advertised are present and working correctly before there's any talk of charging for upgrades. That way people can choose to just use the hardware with the feature set it had when they bought it, or pay to get some newer features. It's also important that the manufacturer is clear in their marketing regarding the policy of updates and upgrades so people know exactly what they are buying into in the first place.
I'm not entirely sure why Akai never went down this route in the first place, because the model they adopted meant they only ever made money from the initial sale (and nothing from second hand sales) - the only way to continue to make money was to just keep on making completely new hardware, hence the viscous circle of never having the resources to fix problems with the existing models.