"16:9 HD displays, which are great for landscape-style activities such as watching movies, but unwieldy for portrait-style, one-handed tasks such as perusing Word documents, websites, and PDFs."
How so? 16:9 works great for reading documents. It has just a slightly longer profile, which simply means I have to scroll up/down less than on an ipad because more text can fix vertically on the screen in portrait. Most web pages today are designed at around 900 horizontal pixels. The page fits very well in portrait using the 1080 horizontal pixels, or also in landscape for that matter. In fact, if you do not have a retina ipad, you would either have to scroll left or right to view all the content on most pages, or scale down the page. Stupid.
I don't buy into the 4:3 is better BS hype. The entertainment industry as a whole has largely rejected this ratio as being inferior to 16:9, and seeing how tablets are largely entertainment devices, it only makes sense to have them 16:9 also. Apple screwed it up again trying to "think different", or in this case, not really "thinking" at all. Because if they did, the ipad would be the standard 16:9 ratio that is currently used throughout the entertainment industry as being the superior ratio for consuming content.
It just astounds me how very little apple fans can actually think for themselves. They buy all the BS thrown at them hook, line and sinker. 4:3 ratio on ANY content consumption device is just plain stupid. Why did they not put 4:3 on the iphone if it's so great? lol What a bunch of sheep.