[mdlug] Big brother gives M$ a 10 out of 10

[Ron / BCLUG]

Jonathan Billings wrote on 2024-05-23 13:43:

>>> However, the encroachment of systemd is beginning to threaten 
>>> this OS model.
>>> 
>> Oh, look at that, you had the same thought
> 
> I’m curious, how does systemd threaten that OS model?

It doesn't.


I've shared this excellent presentation from linux.conf.au called "The 
Tragedy of systemd", by Benno Rice - a FreeBSD developer, in which he 
debunks a lot of claims against it and even suggests BSD ought to have 
something similar (services management system):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_AIw9bGogo


I don't think I have ever heard someone make a claim against systemd 
that hasn't been addressed in that video.


Claims I have seen, like "systemd is a marketing scheme", and "all the 
idiots behind systemd came from Windoze [sic]" are not worth addressing.


The claim that it's too complicated is quite subjective, and on a list 
dedicated to an advanced computer topics is kinda odd.

Pushing technology to make it easier to do more complicated tasks seems 
the essence of tech (to me).


As for this:

 > My rebuttal is that nobody needs that kind of complexity.

I'm pretty sure one doesn't get to claim "nobody needs" unless you've 
surveyed "everybody".  "I don't need" ≠ "nobody needs".




Basically, there seems to be a form of digital Amish thinking going on: 
"tech was best back at $time and anything afterwards is too complicated 
/ I don't need it so shouldn't exist / I don't wanna learn it".


It's similar to "music was best when $teenager and everything after sucks".


Also, a dash of cynicism masquerading as wisdom, couched in late stage 
Slashdot talking points.


Still waiting to hear a good-faith argument against systemd that deals 
with the fact that Canonical and RedHat were *both* looking for a new 
services management system (Canonical with Upstart, which Suse and 
RedHat bundled briefly), strongly indicating some need for such a tool.


My 2¢

rb