Offering a random anecdote: I wasn't particularly aware of systemd's emergence and the squabbling that went on at the time, but I got exposed to it a gen or 2

Offering a random anecdote: I wasn't particularly aware of systemd's emergence and the squabbling that went on at the time, but I got exposed to it a gen or 2 after it first hit fedora through a fedora centric project. At first I was non-plussed and sort of annoyed that I didn't know how things worked, and primarily relied on the compatibility bridge with service that worked well enough. At one stage I ended up having to do some tweaking with rc init scripts would have required a fair amount of haks (in the pejorative sense) and since these wouldn't work in systemd i decided it was the time to get to know it. It only took me a couple of hours to get a good overall sense of the system and mindset, and the minor things I needed to get accomplished ended up being much cleaner in systemd once I "got it". Once I had a good new mental model of it, I found that I liked working with systemd much more than the old guard. Ignoring the technical and performant advantages, I find the framework for discovering and resolving problems to be much more effective and easy to deal with once you got over the hump of the confusing bits of information overload and changed grammars. I've never been a huge fan of Lennart Poettering in the way that he seems to optimize for friction in certain communities, but I think systemd is a real step forward and we need people like him to drag up forward kicking and screaming at times. I user a lot of different posix systems day to say, and it's gotten to the point that I now groan when i have to deal with one still using a traditional init approach. I'm not saying systemd is without issues, but if you give it some time with an open mind I think you may find out it has a lot going for it (and not just the marketing bullet points - thats part of lennart's problem)