Exactly. Calling features you don't use "bloat" is just lazy.
I think that this discussion has been on and off for some time.
I politely disagree to the idea that software is "free": adding complexity to a product makes it more... complex. More complex products needs more maintenance, takes longer time to develop, needs more tests, more documentation, more user support, more disk space, more network bandwidth. Sort of like how adding one more kg to a space probe is "only 1 kg" but once you add the weight of the rocket fuel needed to lift that kg (and itself) into orbit, it will increase by orders of magnitude. So while a given programmer within a large software project might be able to do a cool side-project given some amount of time, including this project in the larger one and targeting a broad customer base will have a snowball effect.
Or (more realistically), adding functions at one spot (e.g. "Web") means that (fixed total) resources will be diverted away from other spots in order to keep shipment on time and on budget. Meaning that other modules will be more buggy or improve less. Some software people claim (only partly in jest) that programmers should be paid per line of code that they _remove_.
Now, obviously, functionality is what makes a customer buy software in the first place. Adding high-quality functions that your target customers wants and are willing to pay for is a good thing. If you have a "product-owner" with vision and stamina, you might even be able to produce a nicely rounded package of features that makes sense to a large group of buyers, doing things that naturally belongs together*), things the users might not even know that they wanted before the product was released. The question then is what functions to focus on. Overall I think that Adobe did some (subjectively) "good" trade-offs compared with e.g. DXO here.
-h
*)Some customers inevitably will want their lawn mover to also produce coffee and scratch their backs. I'd argue that such seemingly random collection of features more often comes from the developers based on "I can do it, so why not", and tends to be bad products. I have a "smart tv" and "smart surround receiver" and "smart Bluray player", introducing complexity and security holes that I hate by heart and disable at first possibility. I would love to be able to buy unsmart tvs with high-end image quality.