I think free vs one-time vs subscription depends heavily on the product/service being offered. I am of the belief that a recurring subscription should provide

I think free vs one-time vs subscription depends heavily on the product/service being offered. I am of the belief that a recurring subscription should provide something meaningful that can't realistically be done on my machine(s) or requires ongoing research, data, etc. For example, I see no justifiable reason for Adobe's decision to go the subscription route. Software like Adobe offers has clear features that are unique to each version. As they build the feature set they also work to ensure compatibility with the modern operating systems and platforms. A customer pays for the version they need at the time. Should their needs grow or they require support for a modern OS that their existing product version doesn't support, then they should pay for the upgrade. If not, why would they continually shell out money on features and support they do not require? On the flip side, data hosting services are the exact opposite. A monthly fee for ongoing storage is the only thing that makes sense. Similarly, a website that maintains a searchable database of retail product information for internet vendors/sellers to use requires constant maintenance and that also justifies a subscription model. One other thought - the whole app game is basically one of trying to hit it big and getting hundreds of thousands of users so you can either reap the rewards from recurring advertising revenues or the one-time purchase fees. Articles like this exist because app stores are overcrowded with choices and they usually don't tend to fan out evenly in terms of users. Usually there are 1-3 that are heavily used with the rest just being noise in the competition for that type of app. Those publishers get the lion's share of the revenue for their specific app type.