Yes, I'd like to see photos of that one too!
Everytime a 696 thread comes up you hear about how thin the forcing cone is and what a bad engineering design it was and how S&W dropped it because they knew it was weak and how they will all peel open like a tangerine, etc. etc. Yet you don't seem to hear that from any 696 owners who use and enjoy shooting them, even with "hot" loads in the 250gr @ 1000fps range (not hot for the gun, btw -- easily achievable at 22kpsi, but definately a 44SP +P level). And we don't seem to have an internet full of pics, testimonials, and horror stories of them disintegrating. Not that most owners shoot them that hot all the time anyway, but they have the capability if they so desire. Now, true, it's not a 44 Mag and no one should try to make it one. But that's a handloader/user issue, not a gun issue.
However a lot of those same concerns about the 696 are easily applied to K-frame 357 Mags, with a known history of damaged forcing cones and shooting loose when being used with the specific cartridge they were designed to fire. Not just anecdotal, or even "this guy I know who knew this guy who said.." type of stories but well documented occurrences. So much so that S&W developed the L-frames to address the issue. And a lot of those same folks will go gaagaa over Model 19s and 66s, etc. But may rarely shoot them with full power loads for the cartridge they were intended to handle, and few subject them to a long steady diet of them for fear of damage. But that's a gun issue, not a handloader/user issue. Strange that there isn't the same kind of apopolexy about the beloved K-frame 357 mags. I unfortunately don't own any, just L- and N-frames, so may not have an exactly accurate opinion of them. I hear they come apart easily with full power loads and S&W could discontinue them...
(sarcasm meant all in good fun; with just a dash of truth)