well, the board was having issues when i originally tried to respond to this, but basically, I said it was a cool idea (like Jay says, fixed vertical height is a good thing imo). But ultimately, i don't think this is that good of an idea. Personally, i think the 16x9 ratio is a GOOD compromise between all the different common ratios. I find it the most economical solution when it comes to the size of the tv vs. the amount of screen realestate wasted on black bars when watching anything that doesn't fill the screen. I mean, just think about how much of the screen will be wasted when watching an older academy ratio (4x3 roughly) film on this new set! With a 16x9 tv, less than half of the screen space is ever "wasted" for any of the common ratios.

EDIT: Forgot to mention that this concept (fixed height setup) is great for movie theaters. Or for people for whom money and space are not constraints so that they can get a big enough set that the wasted screen space doesn't matter when watching other aspect ratios. But for the average consumer I just don't see this being as pratical of a solution as a 16x9 ratio. As an example, when I switched from a standard to an HD tv, I went from a 27" to a 42" so that i wouldn't lose any vertical picture size. & that meant my new tv was roughly twice as wide as my old one. I have nowhere in my house to reasonably put a 2.35x1 tv that would have the same vertical height as my current tv, & i (like MOST of the world) can't afford a home theater room that could house one big enough.