Having less parts than a Glock isn't that big of a deal. Most people people count the parts of a Glock at 34 but that isn't really an honest count. Several of the "parts" are sold assembled and actually consist of more than one part.
Part #8 spring cups (two parts)
Part #3+4 recoil rod/recoil spring (on the supbcompacts is actually 4 parts.)
Part 16a (A? Front sight +1 part)
Part 25a/b (I believe you would add +2 if you have the NY trigger)
Part #26 trigger and trigger bar (is actually 4 parts, trigger, trigger safety lever, trigger pivot pin (the pin that attaches the bar to the trigger), trigger bar.)
Part 32a (A?? that should be another part)
I think there are one or two other small parts and if you really want to be picky you could count some of the molded in parts like the slide rails that are molded into the plastic frame and the metal sleeve in the magazine body. Regardless that adds 5 to the total parts count giving it 39 for the full sized and 41 for the subcompact. The next gen with the removable backstraps will add even more to the count.
What does this mean? Nothing. I just think its fair to be accurate. Some people throw the low parts count (which at 39 is still pretty danged low) around like it proves that Glocks are better than other weapons. If that was the case than a Makarov is a better weapon than a Glock. Its a great weapon but its not better than a Glock. If you throw out non-functioal parts like grips and grip screws on the 1911 you get very close the parts count of the Glock. What does that mean? Nothing really.
Just food for thought.