99% of people don't subsequently edit photos in photoshop; Google's tools are adequate. You're in the 1% who are power users, and so might find the mainstream solution inadequate. For that reason, software like Lightroom exists.
I agree and I don't know why you get the downvotes.
A large majority of users [1] take photos with their phones, upload a select few on social media, maybe with some basic filters/edits, and forget about the rest.
Google Photos is designed for that use case, and not for the 1% power users.
Yes I think Lightroom started to offer online services a while back. I also use DSLR and the bandwidth is not there yet to upload it from a mobile. At the same time, an average user (99%) wants to take a picture with a mobile phone and upload it most of the time, that scenario is perfectly fine with Google.
Google used to be known for not aiming for the lowest common denominator. They've gotten so large and crafty though that apparently "works good enough to capture the majority" has replaced "make something great for everyone".
I think targeting a smaller community is always easier and works better but all the investors would like to see is plan for world domination, aka "make something great for everyone".
