initial exposure to systemd was via earlier releases of fedora - I believe I came accross it in fc 15 - when you're coming from sysvinit, systemd is a bit of a shock to say the least. The simplicity of sysvinit was such that adding a new service, enabling/disabling/restarting etc was or at least after a short time of using it trivial thing to do - thus making a sysadmins job a lot easier.
now - does systemd do more - well yes - but my concern is is this more worth the added complexity - my initial gut feeling was that it does the job, however it betrays the simplicity of linux and adds too much complexity.
after working with it for a short while though I've come to actually like it:-
- its faster than sysvinit - essentially a side effect of doing things correctly
- its got a smaller footprint - so certainly not bloated
- dependencies can be defined for each service - instead of implied by order
- service not running based as before on a runlevel - can be based on a hardware activation,timer,path
- manages more than services - devices,mounts,snapshots...
- services identified by cgroups
- extensive logging.