The fight was fought, and systemd won. If you're looking to learn theory then by all means look into the alternatives, but if you're wanting to use what's in most systems then go with systemd.

If you are new to Linux I think it makes sense to use systemd. It’s the default for a reason. All major distros use it for a reason. It’s only a really small minority of very vocal people who are against it.

If Debian and Fedora and Ubuntu and All the enterprise linuxes use the same thing, I think that says something.

Despite claims to the contrary systemd is substantially faster and easier to use than its predecessor.

It’s simpler and easier to use. Take a look at these examples. Service files are so so much easier to use and are much more robust than hundred line bash scripts.

Systemd:

[Unit]
Description=OpenVPN tunnel for %i
After=network-online.target
Wants=network-online.target

[Service]
ExecStart=/usr/sbin/openvpn --config /etc/openvpn/%i.conf
Restart=on-failure

[Install]
WantedBy=multi-user.target

Sysvinit

#!/bin/sh
### BEGIN INIT INFO
# Provides:          openvpn
# Required-Start:    $network $remote_fs
# Required-Stop:     $network $remote_fs
# Default-Start:     2 3 4 5
# Default-Stop:      0 1 6
# Short-Description: OpenVPN service
# Description:       Start or stop OpenVPN tunnels.
### END INIT INFO

DAEMON=/usr/sbin/openvpn
CONFIG_DIR=/etc/openvpn
PID_DIR=/run/openvpn
DESC="OpenVPN service"
NAME=openvpn

. /lib/lsb/init-functions

start() {
    log_daemon_msg "Starting $DESC"

    mkdir -p "$PID_DIR"

    for conf in "$CONFIG_DIR"/*.conf; do
        [ -e "$conf" ] || continue
        inst=$(basename "$conf" .conf)
        pidfile="$PID_DIR/$inst.pid"

        if start-stop-daemon --start --quiet --background \
            --pidfile "$pidfile" --make-pidfile \
            --exec "$DAEMON" -- --daemon ovpn-$inst --writepid "$pidfile" --config "$conf"; then
            log_progress_msg "$inst"
        else
            log_warning_msg "Failed to start $inst"
        fi
    done
    log_end_msg 0
}

stop() {
    log_daemon_msg "Stopping $DESC"
    for pid in "$PID_DIR"/*.pid; do
        [ -e "$pid" ] || continue
        inst=$(basename "$pid" .pid)
        if start-stop-daemon --stop --quiet --pidfile "$pid"; then
            rm -f "$pid"
            log_progress_msg "$inst"
        else
            log_warning_msg "Failed to stop $inst"
        fi
    done
    log_end_msg 0
}

status() {
    for conf in "$CONFIG_DIR"/*.conf; do
        [ -e "$conf" ] || continue
        inst=$(basename "$conf" .conf)
        pidfile="$PID_DIR/$inst.pid"
        if [ -e "$pidfile" ] && kill -0 "$(cat "$pidfile" 2>/dev/null)" 2>/dev/null; then
            echo "$inst is running (pid $(cat "$pidfile"))"
        else
            echo "$inst is not running"
        fi
    done
}

case "$1" in
    start) start ;;
    stop) stop ;;
    restart) stop; start ;;
    status) status ;;
    *) echo "Usage: $0 {start|stop|restart|status}"; exit 1 ;;
esac

exit 0

systemd is fine. Seriously. It shouldn't be something you avoid unless you have some specific reasons.

I don't like systemd mostly because it gives Red Hat too much power over the Linux ecosystem. For example, udev and logind used to be independent components that were eventually merged into systemd, and the onus was put on the community to maintain their independent derivatives (eudev and elogind). systemd's original developer (Lennart Poettering) has been very open about his intention to make life difficult for anyone that doesn't adopt systemd (source and original quote).

To me, systemd is the Google Chrome of Linux - it tries to make life easier and does a good job of that, but it's also explicitly designed in such a way to push out all competitors. So I avoid it at all costs and prefer other distros like Devuan, Void, Alpine, Gentoo and so on. That said, I don't do enough to contribute back to those projects, so I wish I were more helpful about it than I actually am :-(

Regardless, this doesn't mean that you need to do the same thing. If you're new to Linux, use whatever makes you happy and your life easiest! Practically none of the non-systemd distros are particularly easy to set up and use (Devuan may be an exception, but is likely the only one). And besides, a lot of this stuff is very old, and Poettering hasn't even worked at Red Hat for multiple years now.

But do keep in mind that systemd was a very political topic and still poses a threat to the Linux ecosystem - anyone could take over the project and leverage it to make life difficult for anyone that doesn't want to do things the Red Hat way. And since many of the major distros have made it the only option at this point, they'll have no choice but to be dragged along with it. Keep that in mind as you gain more experience with Linux and think about trying alternatives.

I just want to say that I love systemd. Working with services and timers is just a pleasure. Handling dependencies is sooo much easier. This is just my opinion, but yeah, I can't imagine dealing with SysV in 2025.

Are you someone who just want to use your computer?

Pick systemd

Are you someone who likes to experiment?

Then it won't really matter

After 12 years (me converting in 2013 to systemd on Arch BTW)
I can say we finally have standardization between major distributions.
OpenRC, SysV or Upstart...? How to do things...

Real boot time improvement.
Real multiple instances of the same service (service-name@xyz.sevice).
Drop-in overrides. Builtin DNS cache, timesync, syslog, cron (kinda, timers have new syntax),
cgroups, boot manager, network manager, containers, and more...

Not a Unix or KISS philosophy, but come on, we need a fresh blood.
There is no "next gen" kernel/operating system in the horizon.

I have Devuan and PostmarketOS (Alpine with desktop environment),
I feel like a caveman. Things which are easy to do in systemd, in OpenRC are not trival.
OpenRC in Gentoo is not the same as in Devuan.

Also, more and more software is systemd-centric.

However.
I encourage you to discover Linux without systemd first (extra layer of abstraction may be difficult during learning).

If you're still (relatively) new to Linux and are mostly interested in "just works", then you simply can't go wrong with systemd. It has (for better or worse) become the de facto standard on Linux and is therefore often assumed to be present. Hence, actively resisting it might be 'costly'. Therefore, you should carefully consider whether it's worth straying from the beaten path. Like, what do you hope to achieve?

As for the elephant in the room, what alternative can even put up a fight? While I'd be the first to admit that systemd's design ethos leaves a lot to be desired; it's so feature-rich that I've yet to find any distro that puts good use to (almost) all of them. But, including everything and the kitchen sink does make it hard for its competitors to compete whenever it matters; perhaps it's one of the key reasons why systemd is as reliable as it is OR why attempting to replace systemd on Fedora/NixOS/openSUSE is a nonstarter. (Being founded and funded by Red Hat doesn't hurt either. Nor does it hurt when its main developer is on Microsoft's payroll.)

Though, even if I don't see the likes of OpenRC/runit/sysvinit ever compete with systemd in terms of capabilities, I am cautiously optimistic for dinit and s6.

~~LOL, who am I kidding, systemd will (probably) only be dethroned whenever its PipeWire/Wayland is introduced.~~

systemd is still a solution in search of a problem. I use it but sysV/init also works just fine.

Systemd is objectively slow so I would prefer avoiding it when possible. I can't do it myself though because I'm not very familiar with management of the alternative solutions.

Fuck systemd. And fuck the inevitable downvoters.