That is the inescapable conclusion I have arrived at after shopping for a new TV. Consider the following typical scenario involving two Samsung TVs in the same product line at Best Buy: 1. $999 - 30" 16:9 HDTV set. 2. $799 - 32" 4:3 HDTV set. It's obvious we can get a TV that is 28% larger (492 vs. 385 square inches) for 20% less. "But the widescreen is better for movies and widescreen content!" I can here you screaming. Not really, the two screens are almost exactly the same width (25.6 vs. 26.15"). The 30" widescreen provides only 4% more viewing space for 16:9 content (385 vs. 369 square inches). Now consider that the 32" screen offers a whopping 70% more space for viewing 4:3 content. Even a 30" 4:3 set doesn't compare THAT unfavorably. 16% smaller widescreen and 50% LARGER 4:3 content and probably half the price. I love widescreen content but it seems to me widescreen TVs are nothing more than the television manufacturer's attempt to con us in to paying more for less. In some cases the prices may not compare so unfavorably (although it seems to be the rule) and in other cases you may not have the option of aspect rations (plasma screens etc.) but in general it seems like a no-brainer to me. Flame away...what am I missing?