@Bill_MI quote goes a little deeper than that. Choice is Linux strength, not its enemy. It's in fact its greatest strength. Linux enemy is instead us, its users.
This is so because Choice contributes to Linux scope by widening it and permitting the operating system to reach more users and fit in all sorts of hardware and task requirements. However, on the user side, Choice complicates the user decision process.
But you must be aware that it can be also argued that Choice only complicates users if they fall in too easily to optimization. What this means is that one of the fundamental problems of "too much to choose from" is that our brains are wired to try and make the best choice, and deal poorly with two or more competing options. And "too much too choose from" always carries the load of two or more competing options that reveal advantages over one another. What we must do in these situations is to learn to identify when we cannot optimize our choice further and accept that as a natural end to the decision process. Then just pick one of the competing options at random and ignore the rest, training ourselves to accept that as the best option.
What this means is that, when forced to make an uninformed decision between A and B, train yourself to the following fundamental truth: Whatever you choose will be the best choice. This is similar to the eternal false conundrum of betting on a dice. Many people always take a long time to decide on which to bet from 1 to 6, as if thinking about it would somehow increase their odds of getting the right number. It won't. So it really should only take a split second to decide on a number.
Windows does not share Linux design. You can look at Windows as if it was just another DE like Gnome 2 or Unity. And yet, within the Windows ecosystem you'll find that it has its own share of "choices", since Windows 7 will have a different path to a problem solution than Windows 10, Windows XP, or Windows Server. So in fact, when comparing Windows to Linux, you have to either reduce Linux to a single system or augment Windows to include all its design-changing versions. Then you can make the comparison.
And what you'll find is something completely different altogether.
You'll find that the word "consistency" automatically implies a path through time. And Linux excels, much more than windows, at providing users with that consistency. For years and years and years, a DE like Gnome 2 and any of its derivatives will present users with a consistent workflow that they can master, whereas the type of consistency that you are identifying on Windows is comparatively short-lived.
So, you may know where that button is off the top of your head on Windows. But that knowledge will only serve you for a limited amount of time. Whereas on Gnome 2 it will serve you for decades.