I was just wondering whether there should be any relation between the screen size and the screen ratio of devices. Let me explain. I see that the current line-up of MacBooks use a 16:10 screen ratio; the current line-up of Surfaces and some other laptops use 3:2; the iPads use 4:3; and the vast majority of Windows devices, as well as the iMac, use 16:9. I wondered why Apple would use 16:10 for laptops and 16:9 for its desktops and I guess the 16:9 format suits better large screens, as too much vertical space may make it more difficult for the user to look at the whole screen. I also wondered what the best screen format would be for laptops. The Surface Pro, for instance, has a very nice screen ratio at 3:2, but only perhaps its screen size is 12.3". The Surface Book and the Surface Laptop, both with 13.5" screens and a 3:2 ratio, feel they have a lot of vertical space (although not too much) which could be better used as horizontal space. A regular 13.3" Windows laptop, on the other hand, with a 16:9 screen ratio, feels like having too little vertical space. A 15.6" laptop at 16:9 is much better as it has more vertical space. The 13.3" MacBook Pro, with a 16:10 screen ratio, seems to have great vertical space, much better than regular 16:9 Windows laptops. The 15.4" MacBook Pro, on the other hand, has a little bit too much vertical space, which could be converted into some horizontal space (perhaps the 16:9 format would fit better this screen size). Perhaps this makes some sense, at least for me. A Surface Pro has more vertical space than a regular 13.3" 16:9 Windows laptop (http://www.displaywars.com/12,3-inch-3x2-vs-13,3-inch-16x9). Perhaps this is one of the reasons why a 13.3" 16:9 Windows laptop feels a little bit cramped. The Surface Pro and the 13.3" MacBook Pro have similar vertical spaces (with a small advantage to the Mac, http://www.displaywars.com/12,3-inch-3x2-vs-13,3-inch-16x10). The Surface Laptop and the Surface Book have nearly the same vertical space as a 15.6" 16:9 laptop (http://www.displaywars.com/13,5-inch-3x2-vs-15,6-inch-16x9). A 15.4" MacBook Pro has some more vertical space than a 15.6" 16:9 laptop (http://www.displaywars.com/15,4-inch-16x10-vs-15,6-inch-16x9). I would conclude that the larger the screen, more it would benefit from being wider. 3:2 would be better suited for small screens, and 16:9 for larger screens, while 16:10 would be better for the intermediate. Does this make any sense?