I see the point and I find the article honest in exposing its authors views.
But honestly Wayland is better than X in most ways and while it’s taking time to grow and replace X fully, well, on 10 years from now X will be rightfully forgotten.
This is not a systemd/sysinit issue. Wayland actually fix issues, deep issues, in an old outdated and broken also mostly unmaintained stack of tech that didn’t age well.
I did not yet switched to Wayland everywhere for various reasons, but the fact that where I did it worked very well and didn’t even noticed the transition is proof that Wayland is the wayforward.
Fegmentation is bad? Well, it’s the core of Linux, so get used to it and let everybody pick what they prefer…
I never felt systemd as addressing any issues I personally had, so meh, I still don’t use it and don’t feel the need for it. Of. Course, this is only my personal choice. Good to have.
Maybe systemd fixed issues for other use cases, so there is that.
Wayland too, but the rel difference is that X has been an unmaintained mess for decades and was designed for different technology. Hard to adapt to modern issues like privacy, security and hardware acceleration. So Wayland is a good way forward, and still backward compatible which is a cool and needed feature too.
While systemd, after decades, I can still do without in all my use cases (personal use laptop, various servers, work workstations, and a largish work laboratory with a few mixed workstations and servers). Don’t get me wrong, it’s good to have. But also yo have choice.