Glock as of late really reminds me of Apple. They pretty much invented a whole new market of polymer framed striker fired pistols and dominated it for many years. Glock pretty much just coasted after striking it rich, and said "our product is perfect, so we don't need to change it, " the same way apple stuck with the original iPhone form factor with a 3.5" display that many people thought was too small. Meanwhile, other gun makers jumped on board the polymer/striker bandwagon and created small CC handguns with features like interchangeable back straps (because unbeknown to Glock, not everyone has the same size hands). Now here we are with Glock creating "new, innovative" handguns for an already saturated market that they SHOULD have invented in the first place.
I would largely agree with this... but innovation isn't always everything it's cracked up to be. How many guns (or other products from car parts, airplane parts, computers/programs, phones, etc.) either don't work right, suffer poor performance, or breakdowns or worse - hurt people - due to "innovation for the sake of innovation?" I, for one, appreciate the solid reliable "same old boring" Glock that really does everything I demand in a gun. It's reliable, light, and accurate.
The limits have really been pushed on smaller, lighter, reliable, etc. Think of where we are today, versus just 3 decades ago, in light weight, reliable handgun selections! The innovations were astounding. But until metal can be replaced in the slide/barrel, we're at a relative standstill.
The problem isn't Glock, it's a fickle shooting public that wants new and shiney and forgets the fundamental reason for a carry gun. Smaller isn't always better, and there are rapid ergonomic and physics problems when you get too diminutive.
"Slow to market" - I read that as testing and ensuring it works so as to not have recalls. I recall that a few of the diminutive or compact pistol makers rushed to market with products that were later suffering from recalls. That harms the brand. Glock suffered a recall on it's Gen4 for an unnecessary spring/rod recall; Keltec recalled its P3AT; Caracal; Taurus; SW for its MP Shield; Springfield XDS; Sig P938; Ruger; Tanfoglio; etc. etc. etc.
Now, which would you rather have? A tried and true reliable and accurate design, or new frills that are prone to failure or recall?
As for this new Glock, for the right price I'd pick one up.