My first big monitor was a 32" 1440p one. I used it on 100% scaling and I could see some pixel on that if I really tried, but the size I can't go back on. So my next and current one is a 32" 4k one. It needs a higher fractional scaling though, but Plasma handles is really well even with a secondary monitor at a different scaling.
You are overthinking this way too much. But there is also practical things you should consider before getting too deep on the spec sheets.
How much RAM do you realistically need? If it is just a regular PC for browsing, multimedia and office tasks, then you don't need much. If you don't know how much memory you need, you probably don't need more than 16GB. So get a 2x8 kit, to use both channels.
The higher you go in capacity the harder it is on the memory controller. Dual rank (not channel) DIMMs (the higher capacity ones) won't run at the same speeds as a single rank kit for example.
The MOBO QVLs aren't exhaustive, it's only the list of parts they have verified. In case of memory, they tend to be conservative and also subject to BIOS revisions, so check those too. (Although, this is a very locked down CPU, so you can't go above its spec anyway.)
Similarly for the CPU support, HP only lists the ones that they sell, but other chips with the same socket and architecture will 99% work (assuming you stay within the 65W power envelope). If you want to be absolutely sure (as the could always BIOS lock different CPUs theoretically), stick to the ones they list.
If you just want a project PC to tinker with, you can pick up bare bones X99 systems on aliexpress with Xeon E5 2650 V4 CPUs, 16GB RAM for dirt cheap, like 60 euros.
It says it supports 64GB @2400MT. Now, I would suggest simply a better CPU than an 8 year old dual core and adding an SSD before thinking of maximum RAM support.
Search engines been going relatively fine for decades now. But the crawlers from AI companies basically DDOS hosts in comparison, sending so many requests in such a short interval. Crawling dynamic links as well that are expensive to render compared to a static page, ignoring the robots.txt entirely, or even using it discover unlinked pages.
Servers have finite resources, especially self hosted sites, while AI companies have disproportinately more at their disposal, easily grinding other systems to a halt by overwhelming them with requests.
First and second gen Ryzen aren't that powerful in single thread performance so they more often become a bottleneck. But luckily you are on AM4 platform, so a used 5000 series CPU and a BIOS update should do the trick.
In the meantime you could set a frame limit, that might help with stutters and CPU utilization.
Money is a powerful motivator to do really crappy things, and Apple has done exactly that for decades now. Others are following suit in the lucrative accessory market.
But this is the smoking gun, pointed at the consumer.
Dongles are an admission that the phones they come with don't work in the way the company knows its consumers need them to.
Almost as insidious as how the inkjet printer manufacturers vendor lock and upcharge for ink. Profitable? Indeed. Despicable and anti-consumer? Very much so.
They lose no customers by including it. They lose some by omitting it.
So it boils down to being too expensive to include? Hardly!
You evaluate prior decisions with posterior data. But you fail to take into account the counterfactuals. How do you know how much the FP4 would have sold with a jack?
Claiming that an increase in sales validates the goodness of the decision is not causal.
It is the same logic that would tell you that playing russian roulette is worthwile in case you win and get some reward. That's backwards rationalization, fitting a narrative.
If market research universally showed that people don't care about a jack then why do some phones still have it? Are these manufacturers going against the grain? Surely they wouldn't leave money on the table if it worked like that.
The justification of "they do what sells units" is backwards. It would imply that no product would ever flop. But products regularly do. There is no telling in advance how it will perform, and saying otherwise is falling prey to the problem of induction, whether past observarions justify predictions.
The FP4 could have broke sales records for a multitude of reasons. How can you say which factor caused it when there is only one scenario that played out? We don't have alternative universes to compare, where they released one with a jack, or another with some other altered specs.
Are we forgetting that companies also have their own bias to make the decisions that increase overall profits? They lost buyers (me included) by this change, but they made up the difference by selling higher margin accessories. Companies will only cater to users if it aligns with turning a bigger profit. If adding an anti-feature is better for the bottom line, then that's how it goes. Enshittification doesn't happen accidentally, but by pushing the boundaries of what the users tolerate.
I made the mistake of believing that Fairphone is an enthusiast company, like the Framework of phones maybe. There is some overlap, sure, with the repair-ability aspect and available parts and schematics, but that's about it.
Other than that, FP wants to be a mainstream brand, the eco-friendly Samsung or Apple; the power users can get shafted with their audio jacks for all they care. While Framework has actual hardware modularity and release updated HW modules so you don't buy the whole device again for an upgrade.
Looking at FP's financial statements, I get the impression they aren't doing too hot lately, so I get it if they need bigger margins to continue operating. Just don't be a fucking hypocrite and lie about the reason of the jack removal ffs.
Before BT headsets even existed, all of them were wired and none of them required lithium batteries or chips inside.
Having to buy something makes it bad isn’t really an argument.
It costs resources to produce. It is one of the main missions of FP to reduce this by having to not by a new device if your current one breaks. If buying a new one wasn't a problem, why are they trying to make it repairable?
They are easily repairable and you don’t have to throw them away if the battery goes bad (just replace it).
You get it.
If you start reasoning like that its better to start living in the woods with no possessions at all.
Taking my argument to the extreme naturally makes it absurd. But living in the woods isn't my point.
If you look at FP's yearly financial statements, you can see how they are struggling. In 2021 and 2022 they were roughly at a breakeven point, turning basically no profit, in 2023 their operating loss was 37% of their net turnover.
See previous comment:
I’m saying it is very hypocritical and goes against their brand. If they simply came out and said: Look guys making phones sustainably cost too much, we need to sell higher margin items like dongles, BT earbuds and cases to have enough cashflow to continue manufacturing and R&D.
Ok, fair enough. I would say.
But trying to justify and greenwashing the whole ordeal is insulting. The tactic is straight out of Apple’s “Think different” book. Paying more for reduced functionality. Only for them to sell you more accessories for even more money.
I think I had this all wrong. Fairphone isn't / doesn't want to be an enthusiast DIY brand at all (like framework for laptops) but a mainstream brand that's eco-friendlier* and non-exploitative.
So of course they will not care much about niche features like other ROMs or audio jacks. The privacy focused, tech-savvy or feature focused buyers are not their target.
IC and PCB related footprint is still roughly 80% of the FP4 and FP has little to no control on those processes, according to an independent study.
I have to buy them? Every replaceable and repairable stuff is manufactured and has an impact.
About 90% of other brands you can throw them away if the battery goes bad or they break.
I don't have any of those, for related reasons.
The best one can do is to consume less and less often.
Buying a USB-C-2-Jack dongle or BT headset is anything but eco-friendly. It goes straight against the whole brand if you need to buy new stuff in addition to make it work.
"Google would never do something like that" comments just one year ago. Oh my! Google dropped the "don't be evil" motto a long time ago.