Originally posted by bxf Nobody (I think) is promoting it - it is much too late for that, even if that had been the original intent.
The comment merely points out why APS-H could have been a useful format if adopted on a large scale. Granted, this was a more significant consideration for Pentax, since Shake Reduction was considered a possible obstacle to FF at one time, hence the unlikelihood of this being used by other (i.e. those without IBIS) brands.
Nobody?
No, APS-H was not "a more significant consideration for Pentax", or rather I doubt they were considering it at all. Pentax realized very well that what we're asking them to do, what we want - and what the competition offers - is this so-called full frame, not an intermediary format. And Pentax could see what happened to Olympus and to their slightly smaller 4/3.
Making a full frame SR without increasing the size of the mechanism was a challenge - one among many - but they managed. It was considered an obstacle only by people here, so ready to claim that it can't possibly work (despite Sony having a workable solution since the A900).
They're talking a bit about it here:
Challengers | PENTAX K-1 Special site | RICOH IMAGING