Is there really any need to wait for IQ tests?
Just suppose Pentax can get a Foveon into this Q, and let's disregard the $$$$ of doing that. Even calculated at 3 times the pixel count, it is still pretty small to be able to produce enough quality to be worth the trouble of carrying and changing lenses. Besides image quality , as someone pointed out, other intrinsic problems with picture quality, like DOF, enlargement or cropping limitations cannot be fixed.
And of course cost cannot be eliminated in judging this system. IQ tests may be found to be excellent for a tiny sensor (I am sure all reviewers will be saying that), but not for what it costs. Even with the the best lenses, firmware, or design, the result will not be worth the cost and the trouble, or investment in lenses for the most. Serious photographers will find its IQ inadequate and beginners or casual shooters will find it too expensive. So, very few will buy it, meaning the investment in Q lenses look very unwise, being hard to resell even if the Q mount does not fail, and also that there will be very little new lenses or accessories and very expensive ones if so. If Pentax cannot make K mount lenses, with so many existing K mount users, what hope is there for reasonably priced Q mount lenses. There is also no way that you can have faster lenses or long zooms of quality, without them dwarfing the camera, defeating the purpose of a small camera and making it difficult to use.
Sorry if this is also boring to you, but I don't think posts complaining about Pentax not putting its limited resources behind more mainstream needs were made to entertain die-hard Pentax supporters. Many of them actually care about Pentax as much as the defenders and want to see Pentax innovate in other than coloured bodies, or cameras that only 1 in 1000 enthusiasts will buy. More can be done, for example, to attend to existing issues, e.g. fix the tungsten AF accuracy problem, or to release badly needed lenses in K-mount, ... than to pursue some whim like this.