Might the next Micro be a rather descent camera?

If the new Micro is announced at NAB, especially if released in September, has opportunity to have sensor technology one or two generations ahead. If two generations, it may be clearly ahead of the Pocket on a 1 inch chip.

Which implies the Pocket 4K isn't a 'decent camera'.
You keep going around the forum only posting negativity about BMD and their products.

Have you been reading enough Chris?. When you can make something as good as Alexa, or mini pro, you have a descent camera. Really good is a step up again, and there are very few of those, aren't there? It's all to do with physics and the human visual system. Why do you think I advocated for BM to do something like the mini 4.6k and original pocket, arguably, because they were able to produce an image in the range where the eye doesn't see it as lesser as much, like Alexa does. Now, Red might produce a good image as far as dynamic range goes, but it has issues with that range and lacks color volume compared to Alexa. Yes, don't call me overly optimistic about how good things are Chris, it's reality. The reality is, what you would call a really great camera, in reality is something that matches average vision. The really great stuff has over 27 stops latitude with colour constancy for colour volume, little noise, pixels a fraction of the wave length of light, able to detect single photons 3F holographic etc, a lot of which is old technology. Why do I bang on about those so much, because I don't. Many are not used yet in this application zone, and are a bit overkill. Instead I talk about little steps with technology available now or next. Which will make more beautiful images if you film for them. Simple.

I from the start didn't like the pocket 4k look, and had been waiting fur Braw to see if the colour science would move it closer to the Pocket and past Minis. But people seem to be more interested in posting poorly graded stills, rather than video, and those stills are showing certain features which will detract from the final layer of charm in the image, which without cdgn, I:m stuck with. So, yes, a few extra stops and a even more clean sensor, would make a significant difference in charm to play with in grading. Do you think that people buy Alexa over pocket for no reason.

'Decent' is subjective though isn't it/
Seems like you are usually arguing for something 'outstanding' at a reasonable price point. Even that is subjective.For me the BMPCC4K is outstanding.
Do BMD offer 'decent' cameras? By pretty much any reasonable argument I'd say they were ALL decent, certainly the BMPCC4K is 'decent'.

I'm talking about the actual physical closeness to the fullness of human intra visual ability without significant adaptation. This is part of what makes professionalism. It is up to the professional to use it. The Arri is close enough to look natural, as we are used to a range of looks and visual ability. Nothing too subjective about it. I base reasonableness on true costs and ability, this requires some skill. Anyway, is it not so little?