Switching to Windows could also "solve lots of problems". It introduces many problems though and is an undesirable thing to do, especially in terms of the ecosystem of free software.

About "making Linux better" - that's false on principle, on architectural grounds, and is not a matter of finding.

I personally found no issues with systemd in principal, the architectural issues are largely transient and are mostly fixed, and I can name multiple examples where it has in fact made things better:

- Timer units prevent long job duplication and have mechanisms for restarting as soon as possible if an execution is missed. Cron can't do that on its own, and scripting such functionality is brittle. - Service units are much simpler and easier to understand than shell script init, restart handing is very good to have built in, and dependency management is extraordinarily useful. User units are also great. - Automatic capturing of logs with journald and its built-in disk usage limitations are better in practice than piping to files/syslog and running logrotate on blind schedules. - cgroup resource controls for processes are far more effective than nice/ionice, etc, and can be altered on the fly for every unit without restarting. - systemd-resolved is one of the few ways to get system-wide support for dns-over-tls, dnssec, and per-service/network choice of DNS servers without considerable effort.

These are just the features that I personally see and interact with almost daily, but I have seen and used enough to know that its dbus and udev integrations are stellar and enable useful functionality for desktops and networking.

I understand that some people have decided that religious adherence to a vague unix dogma is more important than features, usability, and reliability, but please accept that some of us have work to do, which includes the maintainers of major Linux distributions.