Mt Spokane Photography said:
Its just another sign of tight corporate budgets due to slowing camera sales. Rebadging a old design and adding minor upgrades every year is expensive, in terms of changing all the advertising, literature, software, stocking warehouses, discounting the previous model, etc.
Look for longer intervals between models. Canon seems to be very good at squeezing every possible dollar out of a design, so they do well when everyone else is struggling. From a business standpoint, that's smart.
Actually, it isn't smart. The reason the DSLR market is slowing is that the market is saturated, and new hardware isn't enough better than the existing hardware to warrant an upgrade even after several minor updates. Consumers don't buy minor bumps, generally speaking. They buy every major rev or every second major rev. That means that DSLR sales are going to tank unless they release at least one major improvement, and maybe two.
You're right that Canon releases too many minor bumps, but to be fair, they mostly do that at the low end (consumer goods) because yearly updates are what that market demands. I'm not sure they can help it. The real problem is not the number of bumps, but rather the perceived lack of innovation and improvement in each bump. If you don't make it enough better to drive the upgrade cycle, your sales begin tonslump, and people start making foolish comments about smartphones eating into the DSLR market....
So what can Canon do? Well, if they can't make big improvements in sensors, why not innovate in their user interface? Right now, at least on the 6D, Canon's menu system feels like it has been patched too many times, and it no longer holds together logically. Their GPS behavior is a bit glitchy.
Their Wi-Fi UI is a disaster and a half. It is tied, among other things, to the rather baffling notion that users either use it standalone or on an infrastructure network, but never change from one to the other. Its ability to set passwords doesn't seem to work, and it chooses a new random password for its network each time you set it up standalone, which makes it very hard to use with multiple devices.
And the lock switch should be more flexible. If I were designing a camera purely for my use, I would lock the WB to auto and lock the image size so that they can't be changed without going into a menu and unlocking them. I would make the lock switch prevent exposure compensation in the auto modes, but not prevent aperture adjustment in manual mode. But that's just my personal preference. Users should be able to customize that behavior, locking various settings either semi-permanently or based on the lock switch.
I'd also try to make it easier to choose whether maximum ISO or minimum shutter speed should have priority when the camera can't respect both.
That's just off the top of my head.
They will put it first into more expensive cameras 
