boomstik45 said:
Glock, on the other hand, proclaims that it has achieved perfection and sees no reason to change or branch out. It will take time, but the fact is this: lack of continued innovation and willingness to bring out a new product (or product type) will eventually take you out of first place and put you somewhere in the middle of the pack. Glock's product is good, but it's no longer dynamic, it has become static.
That is a good point, but I'm not sure how I feel about it right now.
On one hand, Glock has a proven design that just
works. People buy Glocks because they like what the Glock is -- a simple, durable, no-frills design that combines light weight and high capacity. There is a Glock out there for you no matter what caliber and size of pistol that you prefer. It might be interesting to see what Glock could come up with for a new model, but it would be silly IMO to tack on unnecessary bells and whistles as that's taking away from what the Glock was designed to be.
They have made some strides with the SF models, but those obviously aren't a huge departure from the regular Glocks. If they did anything, I'd like to see them experiment with a more ergonomic grip and/or a "better" trigger pull and see where that takes them, since those are the two main things that I see people complain about. Some people like the way a Glock feels in hand, others like everything else about the Glock but think it feels like a brick. Who knows how many more Glocks would be sold if they felt like an XD or M&P in the hand? It wouldn't change the reliability of the gun and would make it more comfortable to shoot for many, many people. I have no real complaints with the grip of my third gen 19 but I will say it doesn't fit my hand like a glove the way a CZ or M&P seems to.
As far as the trigger, many people would probably love to see Glocks come with a DA/SA trigger but once again, that's not what the Glock was designed to be. It's DAO with a short reset for a reason. But I like options, and I'll admit it might increase sales if Glock offered different trigger configurations like Sig and HK saw fit to do. It certainly shouldn't hurt sales, as people who like the Glock trigger the way it is now would be able to keep buying them and people who wanted a different trigger could have that option, too. But thorough research and testing would certainly be required, as if a new trigger design was poorly implemented it might lead to even more complaints.
All that being said, I would lean toward the Glock considering he loves the feel of both guns and the M&Ps ergos aren't really a factor. But I have to concur with tydephan: why is the choice between a Glock in .40 and the M&P in .45? Surely he has a caliber preference... If not, why not consider a Glock in .45 or the M&P in .40?
