in this forum "semantics nitpicking" is very important, unfortunately.
i think, "disruptive" is interpreted by some/many here as "immediate, short-term, massive change", such as "mirrorless cameras bring DSLR sales to a screeching halt". or "Canon bankrupt as market demand for Mirrorslappers has dropped to zero within 6 months".
evidently, this has not happened, so there is "no disruption visible anywhere to Canon/mirrorslapper "defenders".
of course this perception/interpretation does not preclude to realize in retrospect (!) that "within only a short few years mirrorless caneras have fully replaced previously dominant DSLRs" ir even "due to the massive market disruption caused by the move to mirrorless cameras, some camera makers not able to adapt fast enough, went out of business". while there are more prominent candidates for that like Ricoh (Pentax) or Nikon, Canon certainly is not "untouchably safe". they are late to market with mirrorless and are paying a price for it. every Sony or Fuji mirrorless camera and lens (!) sold, could have been Canon cameras and lenses. transition from film to digital cameras has not happened overnight either. yet it has killed Kodak and - in retrospect - can only be viewed as "truly disruptive". or the transition of music on physical media - decades of schellacks, decades of vinyl LPs, 15 years of CDs, to a few years of "downloads" and now a very few years of "streaming" - all those transitions were experienced as multi-year "slow" at the time, but "rapid and disruptive" in retrospect. and they have caused massive "disruptions" for many companies and rhe entire "entertainment/content" industry. as a little example just read up on Sony DADC and the fate of their plants ... fairly disruptive.
canon has been spared really big trouble until now not least due to their good luck that both Sony and Fuji have not played their mirrorless cards very well". they made bad mistakes and therefore failed to grab a much larger share of the market quickly. fuji: aps-c only and irrelevant numbers "pseudo mf" + retro design + high prices; sony: neglect of aps-c lens lineup and bodies, nothing new since A6500 and A5100, poor choice of lens mount for FF, FE lens lineup too skewed towards hi-end, big, very expensive lenses with performance at best on par with less expensive Canon/Nikon lenses. and mirrorless mFT makers oly, panasonic are hanging in the ropes. some video tricks, but that will not save them much longer. sensor too small relative to size and price of gear. oly certainly appears to be deep in the corporate danger zone.
the mirrorless writing is on the wall, even if many cannot see or read it or are in denial. "mene mene tekel u-parsin" may well translate as "slap, slap, too big, too fat"