Manufactures like it because they get to put a bigger number (measured by inches diagonally) on widescreen monitors compared to a 4:3 monitor with the same area (measured by width*height).

But we're doing the disservice to ourselves when we buy it, so your point still stands.

Didn't know ? They are not film optimized, they are cost optimized.

It turns out if you slide the screen material in the way they do they can slide more screens from the same material.

You can still get other monitors but they are more expensive.

Atleast that is what I heared.

A significant problem with this argument is that the majority of LCD panels are actually used to watch film and video, and the majority of people want cheap monitors.

The death of 4:3 is a natural consequence of these facts.

(Now, you could turn it on its side and optimise for reading portrait text, but given the harsh viewing angles of your typical TN panel this needs either an IPS screen or retooling your factory to build portrait panels - which butts against the 'wants cheap monitors' criteria. Technology progresses but not always in the direction you'd like...)