"The Unix approach of doing one thing and doing it well has proved useful for 40 something years because it appears to be the best way of doing things."
Until the one thing you're trying to do is dependent on another thing, which is in turn dependent on a few other things, meshing into an awful mess because each one is maintained by a different coder with a different methodology and none of them keep track of each other. End result? Mysterious and non-obvious incompatibilities that send your system to a screeching halt.
Meanwhile, hardware is becoming much more versatile and interdependent in nature, resulting in highly-dynamic systems, something Init wasn't built for because hardware back then was more static in nature. Was the concept of hot-swapping, for example, even practical back then? Thus you end up with maintenance nightmares like network interfaces coming up in the wrong order (rather an important thing when one interface is outward-facing and one inward). Sounds to me like an argument over whether something's broken or not, with one side claiming it's not broken and the other saying it is.