Oh right, sorry, it's my fault!
So, wait... you two are saying that HTC have no idea that the majority of their customers are contracted through network operators? Or that they know, but don't care? Or that it is unreasonable to expect a £450 device to last more than 12 months? Do you seriously think that they did this on purpose, that they want people to find their handsets unusable after 12 months, that they believe that to be a sustainable business model? Either you are utterly deluded, or incorrigibly stupid.
It is HTC's fault that they made a substandard phone, which has insufficient memory to meet its advertised potential. Were I not under contract I would still consider this a total rip-off, and I would avoid the company in the future. HTC's ideal scenario is that their customers remain happy with their devices throughout their contract, and then are subsequently enticed into upgrading towards the end of their contract. With the first incarnation of the Desire, they have totally failed in this respect. If you don't agree, at least present some sort of counter argument, instead of claiming, in the face of all evidence, that the length of contract is the problem here.