How did you came to that conclusion? In my experience, sysvinit comes with less bloat, and hangs randomly much less than systemd. I've worked with both old debian (sysvinit) and current centos (systemd) systems, and if I had a problem with init, it was always with systemd. If something related to disks or user login sessions fails, with sysvinit most of the time things proceed promptly, while with systemd, you're in for a waitfest/eternal hang.
Systemd seems to be propelled by distro packagers and developers, but for admins/users, it's not that great.
Sysvinit also works. How is writing init files cumbersome? Writing startup dependencies is easy - there is the Required-Start header in the ### BEGIN INIT INFO block where you put the required services.
Because of the stuff you just mentioned. I don't know if a process has started (status could be wrong), don't see the output. Also you enter a dependency hell with this type of info block.
Systemd seems to be propelled by distro packagers and developers, but for admins/users, it's not that great.