Not exactly. It does do stuff concurrently, but not always in "parallel" since it may only have 1 core available or not get scheduled across multiple cores. I d

Not exactly. It does do stuff concurrently, but not always in "parallel" since it may only have 1 core available or not get scheduled across multiple cores. I disagree with that particular wording of the systemd description because it perpetuates the concurrency == parallelism misunderstanding. Not that I don't like systemd, I've been using it for over a year and haven't had any issues, and its concurrent model does seem to improve boot times somewhat and there's no more figuring out how to order your daemons since it handles that for you.