Let's face it, they are changing their business model from selling you a permanent product to that of renting you a tool (or perhaps selling you a perishable service). If that model is repugnant to consumers, it is very likely that a new provider will surface to fill the void. Vote with your wallet.
Changing the lighting characteristics in software is no different than postprocessing in a darkroom, which is really no different than selecting a shutter speed and aperture when shooting the picture to begin with. All affect how the image will be perceived. The human eye sees with more flexibility with regard to lighting than any photograph will ever do. The kind of postprocessign shown in these comparisons merely bring the end result more in line with the actual human perception of an event, which is as much subjective as objective. It makes sense to draw the line at removing actual elements that were present, or adding elements that were not present in the original image. And even that could be acceptable if the image is not represented as journalism but rather as an artistic rendering of the picture maker.
So will they be able to shoot video with these cameras as well?
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review