Can someone explain what the thought is behind using Five-point Tamper-resistant Torx-plus screws (Ipr10 Tool bit is McMaster Part# 5043A22) on the Kinect for Windows? What possible logic is there to this fastener choice?
Do they think this will prevent people from opening the device? Is 'easy to strip' now considered a feature for fasteners? Is hexalobular secure torx considered unlucky? Are they trying to copy the fruit company's most annoying quirks? Are mechanical engineers trying to step up their game to compete with the connector conspiracy that electrical engineers use to keep themselves employed? Did someone make a freighter load of iP*d screws the wrong size and sold them cheap? Is increasing the part count now considered good manufacturing practice?
WHY?!
Posts
3 comments:
It could be a "pass this test" thing, that "real" hax0rz should (a) have every "security' bit that exists or (b) lack any qualms about drilling out a screw.
Of course, that (and every other reason I can think of) falls squarely in the "M$ being jerks" column.
I share the sentiment. Because of the competition to come up with the most obscure fastener, I had to spend $12 on this mediocre-quality bit set: http://www.amazon.com/Neiko-100-Piece-Security-Bits-Storage/dp/B000O5XDOG/
It has bits you'll probably never end up using, they're so rare.
The worst I've encountered were thin torx/hex bolts (2mm or smaller) torqued to some incredible level where I managed to strip the heads and once even bend the bit. What happened to using good old phillips-head screws?
I had to buy a special set of torx screwdrivers in order to be able to disassemble the Kinect to mount it on a pan/tilt mechanism.
The thinking behind this seems to be that unusual screws will dissuade the average user from getting access to the internals in order to try to cheat at games.
Post a Comment