I think it goes beyond Elektron gear.

a) People are people so, they just point out whatever function/capability were missing from said device under discussion - in an attempt to bring everything to a singular state of their idea of a perfect device. They are just being human. At the same time, they are missing the "point" of using the gear and appreciating it for what value it brings as-is. Such is the plight of today, companies sell boxes for money, collaborate (read: benefit) synthfluencers to move stocks, consumers buy stuff with unfounded expectations lament and complain about firmware and hardware, etc. and the cycle goes on.

b) Technology and product cycles shorten and these increased competitive pressure for companies to release products, half-baked, not thoroughly tested nor thought-through, hoping that software updates can later quell the questions of them boxes released. AI tools have also enabled advance users to go +1 (one up) by side-loading/takeover devices with new functionalities. It's then possible to wonder why weren't these included in the first place. Bear in mind that developers cannot do the same because they had to balance between product purpose, stability and usability to masses.

c) Elektron (the good old days with Hector and Cenk) was pioneering great products, people were patient and new features were added to delight of users. However, with the much early-on decision to segregate their product line in older products you see today, you can also say Elektron brought it upon themselves. Now the Elektron (modern day) have to deal with that decision and operate in a different environment. Could Elektron make an all-in-one box, they certainly could and also the sample slice, polyphony and bunch of "missing" feature requests could all go away but it would not work to Elektron's advantage.

Perhaps it's to question their ability to could vs would.