> For example the guy that started this thread (http://lwn.net/Articles/534260/). In general most of the practical complaints I heard about systemd (i.e. not "oh but the Unix way") are about /etc/rc.d.
It's pretty arcane to go rooting around in rc.d when there are tools like chkconfig that have handled such needs for years. systemd still tracks which services are enabled for a target using symlinks, so it's no more or less "the Unix way" than rc.d.
> For upstart, nobody did the work of converting most services to native, which is why you hear screams of horror for RHEL7's systemd but not for RHEL6's upstart. The transition was hardly visible.
Upstart pretty much leaves the SysV init side of things alone and does its own thing. That has a low impact on administrators when you don't convert any of the services over, but it creates a schizophrenic mess once you have a mix. (It's actually alright with *only* native Upstart services, too.)
That's still pretty different from Upstart being more like SysV init or more accommodating to experienced SysV init users.