This can usually be accomplished via an external log server. You don't need the whole kitchen sink. OpenBSD's syslogd(8) fully supports this kind of functionality, not sure with regard to Linux.

But actually if it works for you, I don't see the problem. But others are free to dislike it for various reasons. Also your argument works both ways - take your arguments to the mailing lists or forums for an OS which doesn't use systemd and argue the case for binary logs/systemd (using as many bbcode tags as you like).

Yes but why so much "hate" you and I can only speculate‽

I voted Don't like it The way I see it there is more scripting in computing than ever before, the concept of the toolchains is everywhere in virtualization, on the web, even in databases.
One example is web2py, on Linux it is script, but ported to Windows it is binary. It COULD be binary on Linux, but it is not. It is entirely conceivable for web2py to implement a sqlite-type datastore in python, and then a wholly ENTIRE solution - webserver, database, management and developer IDE become fully scripted. I see this type of software much more desirable than software in binary form.

I do admit much of it is just preference not a fact-based choice, scripts misbehave or break just the same as compiled code does, no difference there. Nevertheless, the script-based solution just "feels" more simpler and more robust than the compiled version. If systemd was some sort of solutions more based on scripts than on compiled code it could be more accepted, maybe.

I voted "Could not careless!" and love the idea of transparency but can't we decompile a usually faster blob just as well?

That is one of the questions I'm wondering myself.

And here's another, would systemd be more acceptable if it did use plain text (ASCII) instead of binary logs?

Although I couldn't care less, I couldn't vote "could not careless" because "careless" != "care less", and I could care less about grammar because I care about it a lot.

Using systemd hasn't affected me in the slightest, and I was originally against it, but I can see why it has been accepted by a great number of developers, despite its drawbacks. So now, the only thing that gets me riled is blind evangelism from either side.

1 members found this post helpful.

Imo, yes it would, although there are other issues that need addressing as well.

1 members found this post helpful.

Or, if it didn't by evolutionarily design branch out system wide?

1 members found this post helpful.

Good question, 10 out of 10 for you!

digital infinity exists let's try just to ask if we don't get

Based on the reply's so far, it occurred to me, is perception as important as the technical details? (binary logs, etc)

As, I personally, am much more interested in the technical side of things, rather than perceptions, but that's just me, or is it?

What do you think?

None of this is just perception.
I suspect it is mostly the admins and the users, not the developers, who have issues with systemd. And not just with systemd but also the other 'non-monolithic' part of the software like the the dependencies, and the added functionality like avahi. When I started a new learning project to put a one-box SaaS cloud together I did not know about systemd, and how it is going to affect me in selecting and building minimal VM images. I do not have the know-how to roll a Linux from Scratch for my VM images, but a minimal system sounds more 'minimal' to me with sysvinit than with systemd. It could make more sense for me to learn BSD and chroot, vagrant and/or docker that than a Linux distro with systemd. On the surface this might be THE difference which makes a deployment model totally inappropriate. Those of us who do not have the good fortune to work at some of the major cloud providers little things like this may appear to be pretty involved, and forums like this are the only rescue.

Does perception even matter? Or is it completely irrelevant?

What do you think?

Not me <go to school?>. That is for sure. Hate is not the word in my case. Just like a rabid skunk.
I_don't_hate_them. But I don't hang with them or keep them as pets either.

My uneducated mind found flaws that I pointed out earlier in this thread. Emotion and philosophy did not
shape my attitude, or, on what I consider a un-needed complication that you are not able to even edit or change behaivior.
Supposedly. One of Gnu/Linux strong points.

If I want no control. Might as well spend the money on Mac.

So in my case. Uneducated? Don't even go there. Even a Peon with a 4th grade education knows how to
survive in the Chihuahua desert where a desk jockey would be dead in day.

Perception aint the point. It either breaks or it don't. If the ladder collapses and you break your feet, ankles, and legs.
Perception is just sand being pounded up your keister.
Cuz you are still broken.

Systemd broke my system. Nuff said.

Edit: I guess not <nuff said>

If it is great with unicorns and pink butterflies. Why all the bug reports with no fixes?
Why lock bug reports. Why be defensive when stuff goes wrong and blame the user.

2nd edit: No I aint gonna waste time posting links to back up what I am saying.
I did thjat earlier and it is just a waste of time in this thread.
Been there and done that in previous threads like this one.

"But, wait!" Your Mac does not use init, either!

It uses a progenitor-process named launchd, which, I must say, is very similar in principle to launchd, and therefore(!) which is proof positive(!) that "Steve Jobs(!) secretly conspired(!!) with Bill Gates(!!!) to ... to ... to ..."

... to ...

... whatever.