[JollySharp0]

> Sure, but we are talking about desktop OSs which do specify a set of requirements to fulfill, and in that scenario I do believe both systemd and especially nix brings a whole lot of benefits at the price of insignificant/small tradeoffs.

I can buy SystemD as it IIRC it ties into the whole Desktop spec that most DEs use now.

NixOS and general discussions about packaging is IMO is bikeshedding. Most of the distros these days have reasonably decent packaging systems and are "good enough". I don't need my desktop OS configuration to be declared in a configuration file somewhere. It is unnecessary. In other contexts, I think it is probably really useful.

> I also agree with you that one should be critical of change, especially change of change's sake. But at the same time it does get old, similarly to when you are surrounded by people still using an FTP server with .V2.4.final.beforeRelease suffices instead of learning git. It took time to make git the default and people naturally resist change. But not always for a good reason.

Equating people not using Source control to those that are isn't a valid analogy.

A more valid analogy would be more like someone wondering why they should use Git when they are perfectly happy with SVN. If SVN is working fine for you and your team, why would you wish to move to git?