Systemd Creator Lands at Microsoft
As someone who thinks PulseAudio is conceptually flawed, I don&#x27;t really get the way old linuxers hate on systemd. I mean ok, from a user perspective certain common things in systemd could have been friendlier, but I always got the things I needed to work and it is clearly a powerful system. While I don&#x27;t really like the way Poettering handles projects, I think nobody who does open source software deserves that kind of hatered for a piece of software they have written.<p>Usually if you don&#x27;t like a piece of software, you just don&#x27;t use it. And this is the core of the problem: If I got the critics correctly the problem has more to do with the way this has been &quot;forced&quot; onto the community. Most criticism on the substance has been just bias colored by this aspect or people being like &quot;I was used to the old system, now I need to learn something new&quot;.<p>The latter is of course a totally <i>valid</i> point. If you want people to change their habits, you need to give them a clear reason why and — more important — they need to <i>want to change that habit themselves</i>.<p>The same greybeard friend of mine who <i>still</i> complains on systemd happily adopted pipewire. Why? Because he saw a clear benefit in doing so and nobody forced this onto him.<p>Critica might argue Pöttering now going to Microsoft is proof that he always has been the devil, I&#x27;d argue it is proof that a certain kind of culture can drive people out of open source. I could imagine a different kind of universe in which the communications between the systemd devs and the rest of the community had been different and we would not only have gotten a better systemd, but maybe also a Pöttering who would  not go to MS.<p>The saddest thing about the whole affair is that it has a stifeling effect on new devs. Who would <i>dare</i> to write another systemd after <i>that</i>? Certainly not me.