IMHO, he touched a point, even if maybe unconsciously: marketing specs vs. sensible specs. You can overload the specs sheet with lots of features - maybe barely usable, hoping they aren't actually used - for the "mine is longer than yours" guy, or design a sensible camera for the target market, and don't lie (too much <G>) about it.
I wonder, for example, how many users of such camera would really need 15fps shooting, or the like. Sure, *some* user would like 15fps and 4K, and actually use it, but they would also expect they are working up to their expectations - which are usually different, for example, of someone taking a few minutes of 4K video on a phone. Add 4K on a camera, and some users will expect it will be able to shooting for an extended time. It means battery, cooling, processing etc. need to be up to the task. It may not be possible to achieve it within the design constraints - technical and financial.
So, for a customer, what is better? A features list which able to fulfill his ego (I use his because AFAIK women are less prone to this), even if some features are just there with lame implementations, or a feature list that says what actually the camera does well enough?