People don't make choices by exhaustive analysis they consider a small quantity of options and by popularity or proximity select one and run with it. Successful

People don't make choices by exhaustive analysis they consider a small quantity of options and by popularity or proximity select one and run with it. Successful ecosystems make it reasonably to pick a highly visible option and come out with something good enough. The proliferation of Linux distros is largely small difference that don't meaningfully decrease fitness because only a tiny minority who themselves had little problem finding a distro think its an issue. By contrast issues like Wayland wherein your plumbing and hardware suddenly matter and you have to become at least somewhat familiar with the plumbing in order to select a usable set of options DO matter because they increase the chance of crapping out when you stroll down the aisle metaphorically and pick a box and end up somewhat satisfied. It honestly makes little sense to compare Mac or Windows to Linux. In the eyes of 95% of consumers an OS either an immutable characteristic of a computer or a feature thereof and they aren't interested in it as a separate product. They might well buy a computer with that OS if the overall package makes sense but they sure as hell wont install it on their windows or mac machine. Those who are technically literate enough to be satisfied are unlikely to be confused if people add 3 more Ubuntu derivatives and 2 more arch ones.