Pareto efficiency at computers configurations

Pareto efficiency - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

Unless you spend a lot of money you will not have the best computer configuration , and even if you do, in less than one year it would not be the best.

So being paretian it would be better to buy a computer with better price that would be the best one 12 or 24 months ago, and that is what people do.

But programmers and engineers do their work at great machines and they do not work for main street becasue they have not a paretian mind.

As computer users  we must learn how to configure our machines to make them work as well as they can, but by default the do not.

Let me explain some easy tricks for any OS:

MONITOR + GPU

settings at 720p (1k) instead of 1080p (2k)

Unless you have a state of the art GPU - actually a cheap Nvidia GTX 750 Ti would do the trick - any software or game will go slow at your computer, so if you switch from 2k to 1k resolution you will play software and games almost twice as fast as what your GPU does at 2k, and state of the art GPUs usually are not twice as fast as the normal GPUs budget computers have, and you will be able to enjoy almost the same experience of a more than 2 times more expensive equipment.

You will have increased fps in gaming at 60Hz, and for working you can impove your ocular health with more refresh - 75 100 or even 120 Hz -

I do not know why the default is the maximum even it is slow,

Why not OSs check the CPU+GPU and if it is not a good one set 720p (1k) as default resolution?

Why not OEMs setup their machines to be as fast as possible with good enough settings instead of slow maximum ones?

Even better put 720p(1k) 1280x720 resolution as default, it will be faster for everybody at actual state of the art GPU tech and name the main resolutions in a an easy way that  normal people can understand 480p (1/2k) 720p (1k) 1080p (2k) and the new one with a good name 4k

Also if there are some monitor hardware problem lower resolutions are most likely working when perhaps a higher one can fail

Other thing is the default size dpi and aspect for a 24" 16:9 monitor or smaller, the font size is as small as any 40 year old person with a little bit of presbyopia cannot read, that is because programmers are younger than 40 and or used to 30" to 32" monitors that are not the rule.

Why cannot the OS detect the monitor screen size and adapt the config? Actual 720p (1k) resolution default fonts are readable almost at every monitor size, other reason to make it (1k) the default, but Why if I change the resolution font sizes must be as small as little ants, why not change only the resolution and keep the 720p aspect? as default. Of course we can do it, it is my recommendation 1k or 2k with high dpi fonts to have almost the 720p (1k) aspect. But most of the people use the non good enough maximum defaults.

SCANNER

Why the default is the maximum 600 dpi or even more and jpg

Offices want 150 dpi Black and White PDF as the default, almost nobody wants a MFC for scan pictures, you want to send PDFs instead of faxes.

Please put the default driver and software at 150 dpi because it is faster when you scan and PDFs are faster to upload to professional portals or to send and download via e-mail.

SOHO  Small office and Homes, users usually do not config or setup this things, they use defaults, some of them would not like your products because they are not setup for normal users.

Of course you like to have the option to scan at higher resolutions for some special picture or document, as you want to go at maximum speed at a highway, but not all the road is highway, and it is very dangerous drive at maximum speed out of the highways, so for the hardware is the same, default configuration must not be the maximum one, as it is now.

 PRINTER

The best printer is the cheaper in ink one, but the default is its maximum quality settings.

150 dpi is enough good, Pareto efficient

Why are the default settings maximum quality and maximum ink expense?

Why must I spend all this time setting every hardware piece to a Pareto efficient standard?

Why not are there at least a question as: do you want your settings to be minimum, Pareto effcient - good enough -   or maximum, in order to let you choose?

Am I mad or am I so rare that nobody at any brand at the computer business has think this is the way to go?

Please feel free to suggest some Pareto efficient settings to add as perhaps camera fps I think is 30 fps 480p - but I so not use cams a lot - or similars.