BUT how much do you know about the other, bigger and more profitable, parts of Adobe ?
I know a lot...I hear a lot...not all of it "good" but not all of it "bad". I know what drove Adobe to abandon Photoshop CS7 (and the rest of the suite products) as a dual perpetual and subscription license. It wasn't pretty...but, in the grand scheme of things, I agree with the decision. Doing a dual code branch was impossible...and since Adobe has invested heavily in the CC, there was really only one choice. Drop CS7 as a perpetual and go all in for CC. Will that be a long term success? I don't know...what I do know is that the entire Creative Suite was a bad thing for Photoshop but a really good thing for Adobe because it went to driving integration (which since I use Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign and Dreamweaver) was a good thing, over all.
Yes, people got sucked into the Suite mentality...they bought what they thought was a great deal only to learn that they gave up their point product license to get a Suite license and were forced to upgrade the entire Suite they bought, not just cherry pick the apps they used.
Then Adobe went with the 3 version back upgrade policy which changed to the 1 version back policy. I really thought they would get much more push back...they didn't. Now we have the CC only as subscription.
But that's for the former CS products, not Lightroom. Lightroom is the first and only photographer-centric product Adobe has ever done (and they almost didn't do it).
But I do know that there are very talented engineers working for Adobe and as I've said before, in the case of Photoshop, it's been successful in-spite of anything Adobe has done nor because of anything Adobe has done.
Reading tea leaves is, well, problematic...some people can read them better than others. I'm pretty good at it...