So we have yet another article that concentrates on the positive aspects of inserting systemd into the ecosystem, but completely ignoring all the additional negatives that are mandatory if you want the benefits. The original "let's do init better" concept was good, and I was a strong advocate if systemd, until the decision was made to switch away from existing mechanisms for all the associated functions. Binary log files that require insane levels of work should there be a catastrophic failure make no sense, and the increasing over-reach does not inspire confidence.
If there was a mix&match capability in systemd, the animosity would be greatly reduced, but the all-or-nothing nature is a simple demonstration if a failure to learn from the past (one word sums that up: regedit.exe)
While this article does a good job of summarising the benefits of systemd, it simply ignores the serious issues it introduces. Had it remained as the initially planned system management toolset, I (along with others, I suspect) would have been happy to use it. Unfortunately, the deep integration has lead to it being almost impossible to extricate from tbe dependency chains, and seems to be steadily expanding its reach.
The April 1st 2015 article on Distrowatch was worryingly close to being real, and doesn't appear to be getting less realistic!