Here is a bit more from the article (in relation to Pentax digital cameras), for some context:
That's sort of the way my experience has been with Pentax...there's always something that holds each one back from being quite all the way right. So what was it with the digital cameras? It was the lack of the lens I needed. For years, all Pentax's digital cameras were APS-C, and yet they didn't ever have an APS-C lens with a 35mm- or 40mm-equivalent angle of view. I stuck it out for a long time but eventually got tired of waiting. (Fuji gives me three to choose from.) Not only might your "mileage" vary, but your actual experience might vary too—I haven't used or owned every single Pentax, especially many of the more recent digital ones. The full-frame DSLR gets high marks from users. But that's why no Pentax appears on my personal favorites list. All of the Pentaxes I've ever used have stayed in use for a few months to a year or two, and I've enjoyed most of them, but none has ever become a real go-to, nor a top fave. You know how people always say "that's just me"? That's really just me.
It's just a subjective impression. Different from the usual ones too - he's not saying that AF sucks, or video is terrible, or the DSLR is doomed, or they are too bulky (compared to Fuji for example), or that there are too few telephoto options, or that in-lens stabilisation is better than IBIS, or that there is a dearth of strobes and other accessories, or connectivity is poor or there is a lack of service and support, or any of the other common complaints. He just had a particular itch that wasn't scratched. (A point he has made before:
The Online Photographer: The Viewfinder of the New Pentax) Fuji (and Zeiss and Panasonic) filled that niche for him.
It really says nothing, IMO, about the strengths or weaknesses of the Pentax system. If there is any message from this (and I think Mike Johnston often has some interesting things to say), it's this: work out what you really like and go with it.