> If the priority for Linux is to capture a bigger share of the dying desktop market at the expense of the server market, sure.
RHEL's next release will come with systemd. The server market is not threatened by systemd, and the growth market in personal devices -- mobile -- will benefit from its power-management features.
> On the server side, the whole "framework for parts assembled ad hoc by a recipe for a task" model is becoming more, not less viable.
systemd units are much easier to write than init scripts.
I perhaps wasn't sufficiently clear; my issue was with the sweeping generalities about what MacOS X supposedly proved in terms of Linux needing to become that kind of integrated OS rather than a framework assembled from parts, not the specific idea that broad generality was offered to support about systemd (I don't really have a strong opinion on systemd either way.)
RHEL's next release will come with systemd. The server market is not threatened by systemd, and the growth market in personal devices -- mobile -- will benefit from its power-management features.
> On the server side, the whole "framework for parts assembled ad hoc by a recipe for a task" model is becoming more, not less viable.
systemd units are much easier to write than init scripts.