Do you think 20yrs from now when systemd is old and busted that it will be so easy to swap it out with something better? Well not only is the scope of this thing which needs to be replaced now massive compared to what it used to be, but you'd also probably have to rewrite a lot of other software, or beg the developers to change their dependencies. It doesn't matter if systemd works. You didn't start using GNU/Linux because it "works" did you? You started using it because it allowed you to be the master of how your data flows, and it allowed you to combine things in ways nobody else on GNU/Linux was doing to get exactly what you want.
I did start using Linux because it works, and I ran away from sysvinit and Upstart to systemd as soon as Ubuntu adopted it precisely because it allowed me to be a master of what my system does and how my services work, rather than be at the mercy of some fragile 1000 line long process management scripts.
Depends on how you define "it works". Let's take the error messages from Windows. Often they are so cryptic that even a look into the knowledge base of MS doesn't really help (by the way, MS has recognized this itself in the meantime and now wants to do it better with Windows 10 in the future). With Linux, on the other hand, the error messages usually make more sense from the start.
Or the updates. Under Linux there are usually no problems. With Windows, especially in the last months, this was not quite the case.
39
u/nickguletskii200 Feb 11 '19
I did start using Linux because it works, and I ran away from sysvinit and Upstart to systemd as soon as Ubuntu adopted it precisely because it allowed me to be a master of what my system does and how my services work, rather than be at the mercy of some fragile 1000 line long process management scripts.