Another daemon for managing control groups

I think you misunderstand, I was attempting to explain the reaction against systemd and part of why it might exist. Clinging to tradition seems to me to be a major source of negative reaction against systemd and you don't have to be an unreasonable person to react that way. The punch line would have been that eventually systemd is likely to receive hallowed status itself and there is no down side unless it has design flaws that are not apparent now and not fixable without total replacement.

Traditions and conventions have nothing specifically to do with Unix or the Unix Way, except insofar as its longevity means it has time to develop them while other things may not. Making new conventions is socially hard no matter the merit. Try convincing everyone to stop saying "Hello, world" and use something else instead; even for an arbitrary string it would be a hard sell.

> For example, the Bourne shell was introduced in 1977 with Unix Version 7
Indeed, and Bourne apparently spent quite a lot of effort individually convincing each of his early users to switch to his shell even though it was "obviously" superior and largely a superset of functionality. It was years before one could presume a Bourne sh. Change is hard (and slow).