# Editorial Published articles for Editorial. This is one page of public article previews, not the complete archive. Follow Next page to continue. Summaries are not the original full articles. ## The Mac mini's compact design is influencing competing mini PCs DevFeed: [The Mac mini's compact design is influencing competing mini PCs]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Sarang Sheth Published: 2026-09-15T19:15:48Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [Yanko Design]() Topics: [Mac Mini](), [pc](), [ASUS](), [ddr5](), [UEFI]() Tags: [amd](), [apple](), [asus](), [benchmark](), [ddr5](), [design](), [desktops](), [desktops-editorial-product-design-mac-mini-mini-pcs](), [editorial](), [mac-mini](), [mini-pc](), [mini-pcs](), [pc](), [pcie](), [product-design](), [review](), [uefi]() ### AI overview The article argues that Apple's Mac mini dimensions and compact aluminum design have influenced competing mini PCs from ASUS, Geekom, Links, Dell, Lenovo and MSI. It also discusses differences in hardware, thermals and firmware, including a UEFI bug that affected one Geekom benchmark. ### Source excerpt The Mac mini Form Factor is So Perfect, Literally Everyone is Copying It Apple's Mac mini is a 127 by 127 by 50mm aluminum square, and the PC industry has spent 2026 rebuilding that square with different logos... ## Editorial: A Brief Essay on Lexical Ambiguity by G. Irwin DevFeed: [Editorial: A Brief Essay on Lexical Ambiguity by G. Irwin]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Unknown (noreply@blogger.com) Published: 2019-11-19T23:16:00Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [Red]() Topics: [Red](), [Programming]() Tags: [community](), [editorial](), [languages](), [lexer](), [syntax]() ### AI overview An editorial essay examines lexical ambiguity in Red and the trade-off between adding specialized lexical forms and preserving a language's flexibility, usability, and learnability. It argues that new lexical forms offer diminishing value and that a constrained hierarchy can help users remember rules. ### Source excerpt The original commentary was posted in Red's Gitter channel, here, by Gregg Irwin, one of our core team members, in response to various requests for the ability to create new datatypes in Red. As a writer, Red has always appealed to me because of its flexibility; but, of course, "the [lexicon] devil is in the details," as the idiom goes (okay, I edited that idiom a little, but it was too cool a link to pass up). It means the more specific we try to be, the more challenges and limitations we encounter, and we can lose some of the amazing versatility of the language. On the other hand, precision and refinement--the "exact right word at the exact right time," can powerfully enhance a language's utility. The dynamic tension between what he calls "generality and specificity, human friendliness and artifice," in the text below, can be an energetic ebb and flow that serves to strengthen our language, to make it more robust. Two quotes from community members provide some context: _____________________________ > The real problem is not number of datatypes, but the lexical syntax of the new ones. -@Oldes > ...However if something like utype! is added, nothing prevents you from (ab)using system/lexer/pre-load and reinventing whole syntax. -@Rebolek "I don't support abusing system/lexer/pre-load, and (in the long view) there will almost certainly be special cases where a new lexical form makes sense. We can't see the future, so we can't rule it out. But, and this is key, how much value does each new one add? I believe that each new lexical form adds less value, and there is a point of diminishing returns. This is not just a lexical problem for Red, but for humans. We have limited capacity to remember rules, and a constrained hierarchy helps enormously here. Think more like linguists, and less like programmers or mathematicians. In language we have words and numbers. Numbers can be represented as words, with their notation being a handy shortcut for use in the domain of mathemati ## Amazon cuts negative reviews DevFeed: [Amazon cuts negative reviews]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Graham King Published: 2006-03-31T12:29:36Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [Graham King]() Topics: [amazon](), [Web]() Tags: [article](), [editorial](), [reviews](), [society]() ### AI overview The article argues that Amazon may remove well-written negative book reviews, potentially leaving buyers with an unbalanced view of products. It bases this claim on an individual account and references prior reports of similar censorship. ### Source excerpt Amazon's star rating system lacks starlight