Re: Wallpaper setter "free" is not a free app...
This tactic absolutely drives me nuts, it's pathetic, and more worrying, becoming a trend.
For the developers reading this, take note... even if your app is first released as a "free lite app" and I absolutely LOVED the application, once I'm asked to pay for it in the next upgrade, I instantly delete it without blinking/thinking once. I download this (not necessarily this, happened with different apps) app because it was a free one and it should stay that way. If your motives are to charge for it (and there's nothing wrong with that) do so from the beginning or mention that it's a trial version. All you're doing here is pissing people off. I believe some developers do this to accelerate the download of their application for more exposure (top downloads) - once the app is up there, they switch to charge-mode. If this is the case, RIM should do something to control this.
Free apps should stay free for those who have already downloaded them. If the developer decides to start charging for it, then do so going forward for future customers. If the developer decides to starts charging both (past and future), then they should release a trial version and a full version, not a "free" version that later transforms into a paid app for everyone.