Definitly 16:10. Havent used 3:2 yet. But in my opinion an often overseen part of apples macbook sucsess is the 16:10 screen. Wich boost the productivite and gives space for the bigger trackpad which is so often called the best.
Even on desktops i try to only buy 16:10 monitors. Which isn‘t easy either. There is still no 4k 16:10 monitor on the consumer market. ( There are $10k+ pro monitors)
It‘s by the way the same argument as goning fir a 18:9 phone scren instead if 16:9. More vertical space
I’m all for lower aspect ratio displays. I would venture a guess that most of the Librem owners use their machines primary for text based work, be it programming, writing or just browsing the web in general.
The question is how much such displays cost? I would guess that they’re manufactured in smaller quantities.
My constraint is that it has to fit in a practical bag, and I tend to use backpacks that have internal dimensions close to a 2:3 aspect ratio. I suppose that must be close to the aspect ratio of my back, or just a generally convenient size.
16:10 or 3:2 is therefore the best fit for my bag if I want to carry the largest screen possible. 16:9 wastes space in the short dimension. 4:3 would waste space in the long dimension.