Except my "obviously" was in response to the question of who had more choices (obviously spell casters), so you misconstrued my point entirely.
You whole argument seems to be predicated on the idea that have more choices is better. I disagree. It is different, but whether it is better or not is a subjective experience. For D&D, I am happy to argue that having some classes with more choices and some with fewer is better design that serves more players, and as evidence I present the popularity of the game as it is designed, and the relative unpopularity of the one edition of the game that moved away from that model (hard to narrow that down to just one factor, though). Given that fighters are the most popular class and it isn't close, and other non-spell casting classes are also popular, it seems that quite a few players are happy to play classes with fewer choices to make.
Speaking from personal experience, sometimes I want a complicated class, and sometimes I just want to play the barbarian, and most players I know feel the same way. So the premise that "more choice=better" in the context of D&D is an unfounded assumption.