I must say this, feeling a strange compulsion to say it here!
I am about to jump ship to Sony products. Just trying to figure out the fiscal damage done by making the transition. I have been waiting for a Canon camera that is geared toward the stills photographer with high resolution without the need for a telescope to see the astronomical price tag. We were told at one point that Canon had an 85mp camera in development . . . you know, sort of 5DS ish. Canon has the capacity but not the will, apparently content to let Sony do the heavy lifting. If a newby asks for recommendations I send them looking for the broader, more capable Sony lineup. If Canon didn't have other revenue streams they would be struggling to catch up just like Nikon.
TL;DR - you felt compelled to sound foolish. Bye.
You were going strong until the end. But in typical troll fashion, you ended with a statement that is completely wrong and easily refuted by facts, thereby wrecking your credibility and merely making your post sound petulant.
Canon leads the ILC market – they don’t need to catch up, they are in first place and have been so for nearly two decades. Canon reports their camera sales separately on quarterly financials, and their Imaging group is profitable, not struggling.
Sony does not lead the ILC market, they have been trying for years to catch up to Canon and have failed to do so (they
are taking market share from Nikon, as has Canon recently). Sony does not report their camera sales separately on quarterly financials. Their Imaging group has been shifted from one division to another several times in the past few years, further obfuscating their results. Many analysts have suggested their camera sales are not profitable (which would explain why Sony buries those data).
Don’t let the proverbial portal hit you in the proverbial posterior on your way out.