It is exactly as the others have said. At this point in history, variable scopes offer more flexibility....and no real drawbacks
There are advantages to both and I for one wish we had more fixed power options. The fixed power is less expensive to produce for a given level of clarity. For target shooting, in its many disciplines, the fixed power is (in theory) less money for performance. Almost any reasonable price 6-24 has poor image quality at 24x, while the same model (if only it were available) in a fixed 24x would be fine. I have a fixed 12x on a silhouette rifle and ranges vary but the target sizes is scaled up at the same time. I find 12x perfect. That scope is no longer made. I also find at the club, which is the only place some of my guns get shot, I tend to use ONLY the max setting of the scope.
I have a current manufacture tasco 4x on a hunting rifle and the scope is very light weight, very low cost, made in china and is clear and sharp. The variable tasco scopes are a significant step down in clarity. All things equal ($$), a variable weights more, with more complicated internal parts and optics not as clear. I can (and have) purchased a Leupold 2-7x, compact or ultralight, for a lot more money and have good performance with variable power and light weight. I have to pay up for that.
I have a Leupold 4-12x on another hunting rifle. It has some advantages as pointed out above. I payed the Leupold tariff to keep the weight down and performance good.
Some newbie thing a big scope with 50mm objective is a fashion statement. Money in the bank for scope builders. Making a big heavy scope is easy and less cost.