Interesting, am on Arch, which was pretty much the first distro to adopt systemd, so it's possible it's been integrated better, but I have no problems with systemd.
I did in fact had many problems with sysvinit, where the disorganized patchwork of individual scripts with slightly different capabilities for each made these problems hard and time consuming to debug.
I don't know what 'conflicts with kernel defaults' is supposed to mean, but I don't suffer from them.
I also operate several servers with systemd without issues.
Am slightly bothered by people who when they see a problem automatically seem to blame it on systemd itself, rather than perhaps their config, distro defaults, the flags it is compiled with in the repos etc. Seems a bit like working backward from a conclusion.
As for "the Unix philosophy" argument, I don't buy it. Some of it was due to technical limitations of the hardware in the 70s.
C is also technically the UNIX philosophy, yet there were many safer, better designed languages even at the time and now especially. Just because something has been around a long time doesn't mean it is the best. That's a surprisingly conservative stance when it comes to technology. Rust, Pony etc. are showing that low level systems programming could do a lot better than C, why not apply the same to the rest of the ecosystem?
Hi there! I am a free software developer. I enjoy working on useful software, as well as advocating for software freedom and the use of open standards, promoting data ownership, decentralization and privacy. If this is important to you, I may be worth following. If you like Go, Rust, or Swift, it may be worth following me as well. Besides computing, I enjoy metal, a good read and occasionally some gaming, (not much time for that these days).