This may have been covered upstream already, please forgive me for not reading through close to 300 comments...
I'm more inclined than not to be supportive, but at least for now, I have some issues. Maybe someone knows of a solution or can maybe confirm these are actually issues and its not just because I'm missing something?
On the Mac News+ application (MacOS 10.14.4):
1) Not all magazines are available for download for offline reading. I'm not certain, but it looks like the mags with dynamic content are unavailable.
2) Although I've read that you can click a button to save an article, the only way I found in the MacOS app was to choose "save" from the file menu (CMD-S also worked).
3) As for that, it looks like the "share" menu, although visible, is inactive on the MacOS app - I've not been able to get it to work at all.
4) Also, the other buttons ("heart" buttons) don't seem to work on the MacOS app.
5) This is the one that really ticks me off... magazines that we "follow" will auto-download if on a good WiFi connection and if there is space on the device. This utterly sucks... my wife and I follow about 40 magazines, but we have a metered connection - we really don't want to auto-download every. single. issue. of every magazine that we follow. At the very least, there should be a preference to turn that on or off - I've not found any such preference. This alone might be a show-stopper for us... it maybe an incentive for most, but not for those of us with strict bandwidth caps.
On the iOS version (on iPad, on the phone it was different):
1) I found no apparent access to the download button. I might have been looking in the wrong place.
2) While they were on the iOS version for the phone, on the iPad I found no share button or "heart" buttons.
3) The "save" feature for articles (supposedly available through the use of the share button) is not in evidence... ever. This applies to dynamic content and PDF content.
I've just started checking it out and undoubtedly I will find more, but so far this misses the mark for us. I really wanted to like it, but Texture, with all of its flaws, fits our use case better.