There are two things that strike me as odd about plasma TV resolutions. 1) The fact that so many are limited to 480 lines - not enough for PAL without downscaling. (But this has been discussed at some length already). 2) The fact that the screens are 16:9 in shape, but the pixel resolutions are often 4:3 (e.g. 1024x768), so the pixels must be rectangular. Are there any screens that have square pixels, and at least 576 lines of vertical resolution? I know some of the 50-inch screens do - 1365x768 - but these all cost something like £6K or more, which is a heck of a step up from the £3k-£3.5K 42" screens. I was thinking about the second of these issues, and it occurred to me that maybe rectangular pixels might actually be a good thing when you want to display an anamorphic widescreen signal. After all, the anamorphic signal itself is actually being transmitted as a 4:3 image, and expecting the display to stretch it horizontally. By directly mapping square pixels in the (scaled) anamorphic 4:3 image to rectangular ones in the 16:9 screen, you have a neat way of doing the stretching operation. BUT: what happens when you want to watch non-anamorphic 4:3 material on a screen with rectangular pixels? I guess the scaler could rescale the image vertically but not horizontally, and then map to the rectangular pixels. But how good does this look? Is it the case that plasma screens with rectangular pixels do a comparatively good job with anamorphic signals, but less good with regular 4:3? And are most video scalers actually able to take a 720x576 input and rescale it to 720x768? That's not exactly a standard resolution.