I speculate that many of the most controversial changes in GNU/Linux were rooted in chasing after this goal.
I'm not sure what, if anything, I materially gave up other than that all of those components have a contracted API now so all future components will need to adhere to that API.
For example, OpenRC had comparable boot times as did systemd and it was modern and stuck to the "do one thing" principle. Systemd was chosen because lennart and corporate/rhel people who have influence and a financial interest in expanding market share pushed it. Just like how things are done at apple and microsoft.
I feel there is a moderate middle path when it is possible to get Linux desktop to a state that many can use it but without compromising on the flexibility it can provide. Distro's like Linux Mint are so close nowadays, in a way it is very boring. But boring is what you want. It doesn't just tumble over for like... reasons, but it also it really easy to use if very predictable.