In reply to Matt Cromwell.

My comment was (perhaps too) elliptical: A freemium model wherein the development firm releases an intentionally crippled version of a product (e.g., shipping with only one gateway [and one which many organizations avoid for various reasons]) and then sells 'premium' addons to enable functionality that should have been part of the core is extremely objectionable. From what I've seen of EDD, I would have some of the same objections to their model (e.g., charging for the Stripe gateway which is an order of magnitude easier to implement and at least that much friendlier than PayPal), though I have no active projects using the plugin so my familiarity with it is limited. As for WooCommerce, it's a somewhat different situation as they are maintaining a market wherein third-party developers can sell addons, which makes it less directly comparable to Give and EDD.

Naturally, developers have to find a revenue model that will keep their businesses afloat, but there is something decidedly unsavoury about building a functional product and then removing bits of it to sell back to users at a premium. It would be like selling a car, and then telling the buyer to drive with a pair of pliers; of course, if the buyer would prefer, you would be willing to sell a shiny, new steering wheel (the only fully compatible model, of course) for the low, low price of $15,000. Freemium models which depend on a crippled core cross this (perhaps not so) fine line.