It really is not that simple, at all. I've successfully ported Classic Chrome to the X100S and only managed that because it's internally the same cameras the X100T, which I copied the profile out of. It can't be applied to an X-Trans I sensor camera because the information coming off that sensor is different; it would be a completely garbled mess. The interpretation of that information, even within the camera, to create an image, is different.
Let me put it this way: let's say you have a translator which converts all 1s into 2s. You run the following sequence of 0s and 1s through it:
001001001
That becomes
002002002
Now you take that same translation and you apply it to a different sequence:
010010010
Becomes
020020020
002002002 and 020020020 are not the same thing. You ran the information through the same type of conversion and that information contained the same number of 0s and 1s... but the initial information was in a different order, so your final result is still in a different order, too.
Now, obviously, that is a hugely simplified example of what's going on within these cameras. With a camera you're actually talking about interpretation and conversion of R, G and B values, millions of times over in every possible combination of values. But that just means it's even harder to end up with the same results when using the same conversion. Blues will come out aqua or purple, reds will come out orange or purple and greens will read as aqua or orange.
So. No, there is a huge difference between the X-Trans I and X-Tans II sensors when you're talking about how data is interpreted and converted into an image for RAW, let alone how colour profiling can be applied to that file—remember, those profiles are applied before the image is converted to a .jpg—and you can't just copy & paste a profile made for one generation of sensor to the previous one.
Yes, they could make a new profile from scratch which would deliver the same results but for the old sensors. This would take time and money and in the end be a watse of R&D which would not see them profit in any way. They would be throwing away resources on outdated hardware which they either don't make any money from (E1) or very soon will not make any money from (Pro1). You're literally asking them to spend money so you can have a new feature which will further ensure you are less likely to buy into a newer product from them. No company, ever, spends money to lower sales. That is absolute insanity.
This is, as I've noticed with certain other mediums, too, an unfortunate effect of giving people any free updates to any kind of hardware. People get one or two nice bonuses to begin with, things they were never promised or had dreamt of when they made their purchase, and then they get in a huff when, years down the line, you stop handing out freebies.
