Have you picked one up yet?
As the owner of a G-26 and a PF-9, I assure you the Glock will be easier to shoot, more familiar in manual of arms and carries in a pocket like a brick! The PF-9 is kind of tough to hang on too, the trigger has to be allowed to go all the way forward when shooting and it carries in a pocket not half-bad.
I was about to trade my Kel-Tec for a littel .38 snubnose, but after shooting it some today, changed my mind. It is light and easy to carry. Pocket, ankle, IWB, not a problem. It is snappy to shoot though, and mine has a recorded failure rate of just over 2%. Many of these were early on and with other shooters. It absolutely will not tolerate anything but a firm hold; a weak grip will get you a failure-to-feed surer than not. Practice with it coming from a pocket while sidestepping your target, or retreating, or right on the target (if you can) using one hand, and get the muscle memory down so you have that firm grip every time.
The PF-9 can be carried in the elastic waistband of a pair of sweat pants or shorts. I carry mine mountain biking because it is small and light enough to not get in the way.
In comparison, there is very little loss of speed and reliability of the G-26 over the G-17 (have both). It is also the smallest gun I am comfortable practicing with regularly and putting lots of use on. But the Glock is happiest on a belt-holster in my experience. It could be ankle carried, if you are built right, and if you're a smaller person putting it in your pocket screams "GUN!" (Not that half of the Western world will notice your bulged pocket; they're thinking about the next "American Idol" or "Lost" or something like that.)
In the end, I think it pays to have both on hand, and a snubnose revolver AND something like a P-32 or 3AT or LCP.