Well let me put it like this:
Nokia is using mostly Linux to create Maemo. Linux is maintained by various organizations, saving Nokia big money. I'll be damned if they suddenly start charging me for device support. And if the N900 meets the hardware requirements, there shouldn't be any extra development costs to get it to run Maemo 6. Now if you mean forcing them to lower the hardware requirements of Maemo 6 to make the N900 compatible, I'm against anything of the sort.

I wouldn't use Apple as any kind of example. The "legacy" devices they charge for updates are simply the same device, just with slightly slower hardware. There may be added support for new hardware, but the software has nothing revolutionary to preventing it from running on older hardware. They're just being predatory, just like blocking Flash in the browser to create the need for more apps.

Since they make money off of the apps, wouldn't it serve their best interests to allow those devices to run the newer OS? Since they enjoy massive record breaking profits, shouldn't they show some goodwill to consumers that create those profits and not charge them for filling the functionality holes in the OS? The predatory practices of Apple should be something Nokia avoids. As the market leader, they don't need such underhanded tactics. Nokia could theoretically lower device ownership costs for consumers. Apple has no interests at heart other than its own, which will soon be evident when they're the only mobile OS unwilling to allow a port of the Qt frameworks, Java, Silverlight, or Flash. Their motive is profits at the expense of the user's experience or access to technology or services. Nokia's history has been about enabling developers and services for greater consumer access.

So keep your Apple business models. They've had a decent two year run, but have done little to lowr Nokia from its throne. Linux allows them to save on development costs, and they're able to pass those savings on to us or reallocate the money to research and development and better services. What has Apple done with its profits to better the consumer experience, to allow greater access, or make their devices cheaper?

So naw, naw, HELL TO the NAW, I ain't paying. And any developer supporting an OS should run if the manufacturer forces such. An OS is a platform, and as long as that platform's hardware doesn't drastically change, neither will its software, so no cost should be needed. And unsupported outdated hardware should be repurposed for the lower end OSes. Let me install an open source Symbian on my older devices if the new OS is incompatible.