You’ll have to point me even closer because none of the comments I have seen on that post state what happened is different than what I described above?

I can see a comment stating the switch is justified in their eyes, but it doesn’t negate that it is a bait-and-switch model.

Can you explain?

As far as I can see OP took the original article headline verbatim; the article itself does describe the exact kind of bait-and-switch model as I’ve heard it used: company offers open standard edition, after a while switches it to basic / ‘core’ offering which locks e.g. Linux access behind a (steep) paywall.