How is 3:2 'significantly better' than 16:10? It's 15:10 vs 16:10!

To continue this line of thought, would 14:10 be even better than 15:10?

Why do you think 3:2 is better than 4:3?

4:3 laptops become too bulky and too deep. Don't get me wrong, I loved my ancient 1600x1200 Lenovo T60p, but it was a beast to carry around and required tons of lap/table space. 3:2 fits significantly better in a bag/backpack and significantly better on a desk or airline seat back. 3:2 gives significantly more visible space than 16:9 or 16:10 while still being trivial to move my fingers up and tap on something on the screen (unlike 4:3).

Furthermore, 3:2 screens are available at proper useful screen densities. 1080p is too coarse even at 13" (and unusable at 15") while 4k is so dense as to be a waste at anything below 17". 1440p is quite rare. 3:2 screens, on the other hand, come in at usable sizes like 2256x1504 (Framework), 2496x1664 (Surface Laptop 3 15"), and so on - enough DPI to give you beautiful crisp fonts without requiring you to keep shoveling lumps of coal at your GPU to drive your desktop.

Huawei laptops too. Any others?

Acer has a few 3:2 Windows/Chrome laptops