One of the main reasons Photoshop and Illustrator became widely used, is that every eleven-year-old with an interest in design or photo editing would torrent these products and learn the workflows inside out.
Autodesk seems to have somewhat figured this out, with Fusion360 having a free hobbyist license for instance.
The switch to subscriptions has been a giant success for Adobe.
Their stock went from hovering around 30$ for a decade from 2000 to 2011-2012, to skyrocketing every year since they introduced the subscription model (in 2011-2012), now being at roughly 450$.
Anyone who doesn't think that's a giant success is living in an alternate reality.
It’s just another example of “only stock price matters, we don’t care if users like us.” It’s a wild success if you own Adobe stock, and feels exploitative if you don’t.
It's a free market - go and use competing products that 'care'. Or if none of them 'care', maybe the problem is human nature, at which point, feel free to shake your fist at the sky and converse with whatever God figures you think are in charge :)
Put another way: if I was a 15 year old just starting out, Adobe and AutoCAD would have nothing for me, and therefore I would start using other products out of necessity.
Apple got one thing right from the very start back in the late 1970’s: hooking the kids early was important. They are your future users.
2. The above point is moot because I, and every student I knew, used a school copy on a lab computer or… obtained a copy without paying
I think your second point is moot personally, forcing students to break the law to obtain Photoshop is not a solution.
I don't like subscriptions personally, but most people do not care and it has definitely made Photoshop more affordable for the average person. This is reflected in Adobe' stock price.