I have a number of typos and see I didn't explain myself well at all (e.g. frequency should have been resolution... oy vey for being tired). What I had more in mind is this:
* MS knows they are leaky.
* MS also knows they, at some point, have to include developers (leakers).
* MS's last console saw a progression in GPUs put into dev kits, i.e. the first dev kit does not need a GPU matching the end product (which may not be feasible and is expensive).
* Scenario: MS has plans for 1080p TSRs (doubtful); 720p is roughly half the resolution of 1080p, so they could squeak in a half performance GPU in early dev kits. With key personnel they could communicate the desired end goal but keep more fuzzy "broadcast" specs, i.e. what is in the dev kit with little need to disclose what the final target is. As you noted your low level testers need not know that what they are seeing in the dev kit is different from the end product (which is common enough).
If the goal is to prevent leaks and game the competition I don't see why mass leaking is that hard. The problem I see is more with shared contracts at AMD. Hence Dave had commented that services, and less so hardware, would differentiate.
While I am not saying MS has some sneaky effort to confuse Sony (like the above) I do think it is pretty clear they have been leaking conflicting data. And it isn't hard to use shifting dev kit hardware to confuse. I wasn't trying to imply last second wholesale changes or keeping developers in the dark, to the contrary using developers as part of the leak strategy.
