Oh, one other thing... take a good look at the two camera tops illustrating the original R. Cicala article. Besides the black tape, there are at least half a dozen other design changes between the two. Different parts, assemblies moved around, etc. Why is this and is one improved? Different plants in different countries? Changes due to recognized problems? Cheaper or more efficient methods of manufacture? Parts or supplier shortages? I'd be more concerned about all those changes in the design between the two models than about a bit of black tape. It does leave one to wonder about who designs these cameras, and how well they are tested BEFORE they go to manufacturing. On the other hand, have three Canon Powershot S3IS "superzoom" PnS at home which are our "everyday" carry around cameras (bought an extra "in case" never used it), and one has over 100,000 shutter actuations on it, never failed me yet. Never took it apart, and have no idea what's in it, but it works, tape or not.
This is my first posting to dpreview, although I have read quite a few comments over the years. Some photographers seem to be way to concerned about fighting over brands than using their cameras creatively or for work (or both). While I agree that manufacturers should try to get their designs correct without having to recall their products, we demand complex cameras at lower pricing, and new models continually. As a general comment about ALL the manufacturers (and I own Nikon, Pentax and Canon DSLRs, and have owned Hasselblad, Konika, Nikon, Rollei, and Minolta SLRs/film cameras) I wish they all would produce products designed more durably, offer firmware upgrades to keep them as current, and stop making new models and incompatible lens mounts continually. No wonder they introduce bugs! BTW, all cameras and lenses use tape in their construction in the last dozen years. My Nikon D zoom lenses are held together with factory supplied standard cellophane (Scotch) tape.