Maybe Canon will use the EOS M system as a testbed for IBIS and presumably full sensor 4k: If the systems work in the field, tested by hundreds of thousend customers you can track failure rates of subsystems and customer feedback.
E.g. the EF-M 32 f/1.4: A strange lens because it is designed for an "amateur camera system" but is in my opinion something like a mini RF 50 f/1.2 construction wise and IQ wise (TDP, both lenses, f/1.4
https://www.the-digital-picture.com...eraComp=1221&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1) The RF wins the direct comparison but (1) maybe the influence of the higher sensor resolution (~112 % scaling / linear) helps the perception and (2) the combo is not miles ahead but ~ 5 times more expensive.
But where are the raving reviews about EF-M 32 two days after its availability? Missing. Where have been the bad reviews if it were crap? Missing too.
Releasing stuff with new features/capabilities for the EF-M system is IMO a low risk procedure. The M50 is a good example because it has a lot of features (and some standards are underrepresented) which were new at the time of introduction and maybe Canon will do the same with an EOS M5 mkii adding IBIS and maybe 4k without additional crop.
This might keep the EOS M system alive for a longer time especially if Canon releases some fine primes in the lower focal length region like
EF-M 10 f/4.0 (16mm equiv)
EF-M 15 f/2.0 (24mm)
(EF-M 22 f/2.0) (35mm) done, pancake
(EF-M 32 f/1.4) (50mm) done, high quality, high aperture standard prime
EF-M 53 f/1.4 (85mm)
EF-M 85 f/1.8 IS (135mm) <= f/1.8 to keep the diameter inside the ~60mm standard