The USSC majority which ruled (narrowly) for the Colorado baker basically wrote a blueprint for States to follow if they want to get away with punishing anyone else for “homophobia”.
In the Colorado case, the “Civil Rights Commission” was stupid enough to put anti-Christian hatred in their minutes, so the Court found that their motivation made their decision unacceptable.
The Court basically said to Colorado, “Hey, don’t be so stupid! Keep your anti-Christian hate to yourselves, just vote against discrimination, and you’ll be OK”.
Following that clear set of instructions, I don’t expect any other bakers or florists to win their cases.
Your take is exactly correct. The ruling last year wasn't really a win for the bakers. It was a ruling against the Colorado commission, that felt safe enough in their bigotry to make their bigotry a part of the public record. They know not to do that now.
If you read through the oral arguments on this case, a couple of the judges were begging the attorneys representing the bakers for a way to rule for them that would also be in line with previous rulings on 'public accommodation' laws. The court dug itself a deep hole years back with its rulings regarding what is required under the guidelines of 'public accommodation', and unless it is ready to undo that unholy mess, it really doesn't have many options. For the record, I do not believe the court will address the horrible hole they created.