Originally posted by biz-engineer Pentax is a special case. You could also ask why Pentax does IBIS, pixel shift, telescope lens design and 36Mp FF camera at $1800, while Canon and Nikon aren't doing this.
Personally, I know that is I want classic all purpose camera system, I have to go Canon or Nikon, and if I want original and not always effective features I stay Pentax.
Man theses features work as intented and 36MP for a cheap price could not be seen as a drawback as this is less expensive than competition. You say not effective, that purely subjective and on the limit of trolling.
While we can agree Pentax K3 is great for AF-S not yet for AF-C there nothing that say the K1 will not fix that as this is one of the key advertised feature.
Don't want/like K1, nobody force you. Whoever you are, you should buy it only if you think this is a good compromize for you. That's common sense.
But this post of yours doesn't look very constructive, you bash to bash, not because you have really something to say.
As if you want a classic all purpose camera system, all DSLR from the most basic do that. They all have the basic features you need to major at a photographic school anyway and with proper skill and accessories can do all kind of photography. Studio, Portrait, Stree, Action/Sports, BIF, macro, fashion, weddings... The biggest limitation has always been the photographer, not the gear.
if you feel too limited by your gear, you say more on your own limations and skills than on the gear limitation and capabilities.
There millions of historical photos on all kind of subject that prove very basic gear can get you very far.
As for Pentax and action/bif/sport, we have many example here on this forum and many users that do it on a regular basis. If they can do it, it mean the gear is good enough for them. If you can't or if I can't, that because you or me are not good enough. As the gear is the same but it is not the same photographer, sure the gear is not the root cause.