Tribalism leads to choosing between two hobbled solutions because it closes the door on teamwork across tribes. Ember has its flaws but their upgrade strategy is world class. Every maintainer of an open source project should at least be familiar; but how can that happen when ppl happily report they "have heard of Ember and would NOT use it"?
There's no law of physics preventing it. I'll give you that.
But between fragmentation of effort, few full-time collaborators, no funding for less interesting work, and other such things, there are many reasons we can't (and don't) have any 5/5 frameworks with huge community and support.
From a comment without any substance, this is rich.
>And 5/5 is 1 genius
Besides, the ad-hominem, I was referring to a quality rating (as in "5 out of 5 stars") not a generic ratio.
But even at that, 5/5 (1) is bigger than 3/5 (0.6), so the point remains, either way you look at it, Erdos.
As in nature in general, it helps, from an evolutionary standpoint.
Having too many, and letting them all be, instead of people rooting for their favorite and having one or two emerge as the leaders, leads to dispersion of resources, confusion for newcomers, and multiple weaker implementations of the same thing...
Even if the emergent leader is not the best, the mere fact of it having eclipsed the others, means tons of work, libs, documentation, books, support etc will be concentrated towards it.
And it's better to have one leading framework that's 3/5 good with huge community and support, than a 5/5 good framework with lackluster community and support.