Feature-itis is the death of usable, useful software, commercially or Open Source.
I don't mean you can't SELL such software (*cough*MS-Office*cough*), but the software sucks.
Apple's success is understanding that one simplifies by removing choice, and this helps _most_ people find the software more usable and useful.
(And no, Apple doesn't walk on water, and yes, they make tons of mistakes and bad choices. No fan-boi here.)
There are a number of constituencies who will _hate_ software simplified this way. One of those is the typical developer, who's an "ultimate customizer" and typically wants all the options available and discrete control over them.
This difference between developers and "most people" is one of the reasons so much software has awful usability: Developers build it for someone like themselves. If there's no one with the professional capacity of evaluating a design's usability, or no corporate will to understand and implement the findings of such an evaluation, the software is gonna suck, for most people.
Yes, there are a few unicorns out there: Developers who know that the typical developer isn't like most people, and can empathize with people who aren't customizers. But they're scarce as...unicorns.
And there are a few use cases out there (IDEs, for example) built for these customizer constituencies, which do well by providing all the options for them. It's often hell getting these expert-focused tools past the usability staff, who, obviously, aren't like developers, and can't see their own blind spot here.