It's rushed, just like Q, although the design of Q is much better.
What makes you think the Sky Q is rushed? It's been in development for quite a while AIUI (and the use of Unicable LNBs is a very neat development)
Err, it does not work properly. Many bugs and issues reported over on Sky forums. A mate has it, works ok most of the time, but it gets pink screens and the extra box is unreliable.
I suspect, like VM's Tivo roll-out, however rushed or un-rushed, stuff will only surface when properly hammered by users. I was an early Sky+HD adopter and that had its fair share of issues. (And a nasty hardware design fault in the Thomson PSU capacitors...)
That doesn't mean it was rushed... (I know some of the people who worked on it - it certainly wasn't a last-minute development) At least the box appears to be powerful enough to cope with most demands.
There IS an issue with the Sky Q Mini boxes though. They don't support H265/HEVC - only H264/AVC and MPEG2. So you can't record UHD shows (which are H265/HEVC) on your main box and then watch them on the Mini apparently, even if you were happy with an HD or SD downscale...
Did Sky have anything to do with Unicable LNBs? thought these started before Q.
No - but I think they are one of the first to use them in this way (to allow large numbers of tuners to be provided in a single receiver fed by only two rather than 4 LNB cables) rather than for multi-dwelling distribution over a single cable (which was, I think, the original aim) The real reason for this is presumably to avoid having to recable existing Sky+ set-ups. (Only the LNB needs to be changed in these installs)