SymtemD "is" a platform
I am borrowing Bjarne Stroustrup comment about Java because SystemD behaves the same way.
The proof is to find that it has more than one million lines of code. With that size, it could be a complete operating system. And, several things are being "attached" to its working model instead of being created as completely independent things. These facilities will not work without SystemD.
Then, if you like that platform or if that platform is good enough for your pattern usage, go ... use it. But if this doesn't work in the expected way or impose hard restrictions that you can't follow, then you must find a complete replacement for those more than 1 million source code lines. In fact, SystemD with Linux is more and more similar to MacOS than to UNIX.
In that case, Greg is wrong when asserting that SystemD is "the" solution. I will agree with him if what he say is that SystemD is "a" solution to problems "some" people have. And the main issue here is that if you want to do something very special (the type of things Linux is extremely good at), to dig on those thousands and thousands of lines of code to understand why your solution is not working as expected is a complete waste of time that leads to nothing. But ... you always can replace SystemD, right?
I expect, and pray, that Linux "the kernel" never be hard attached to SystemD. They must be different and completely independent things. And you see, as it is usual with software, somebody in the future will arrive with a better solution to the problems that current SystemD users have and, in that moment, the right thing to do is to discard SystemD as an "obsolete" piece of software without breaking Linux.