If you bought a house would you expect a smaller replica of your house to be free? No, it requires work to build that house just like the original and therefore costs money.
If you bought a house, would you expect to be able to use that house on both your desktop AND your laptop, because it's the same damn house? Uh, no, because physical matter doesn't work that way. In case you haven't heard, though, copying data _does_ work that way, and many people DO expect that if they buy music they SHOULD be able to use it on more than one device. And similarly for games (when it's a single chunk of code), which is actually how Minecraft actually works.
Note, I'm not arguing that MPE should be free with purchase of Minecraft, or that it shouldn't. I'm just pointing out the deadly obvious: that physical-goods arguments are basically useless for digital goods.
I don't know, I think it's pretty good and certainly better than yours. I assume you don't write software because that's not how porting works. Mojang didn't do a copy/paste job to create the mobile version they actually had to hire a _separate developer_ for the sole purpose of developing the Android game. It probably reuses some assets and code but it's not an easy task to optimize a game as heavy as Minecraft for a mobile device.
You can't copy Minecraft from your PC to your Android phone like an MP3 (well you can, but it won't work). My analogy was trying to get to the point that a smaller house would be able to reuse assets (scaled drawings, design, etc.) but it still requires someone (similar to a new developer) to create it and port the existing design to the less complicated design.
No, that's where my analogy fails. The intention was to use an analogy that someone who doesn't understand software development would understand. It only applies to the development aspect and work required - not the ability to make copies (Minecraft Mobile is not a copy, a separate version).
