The article didn't mention why 16:9 screens are chosen over 16:10 screens. You have to make 5% less pixels (screen area) which is a direct cost saving. You can

The article didn't mention why 16:9 screens are chosen over 16:10 screens. You have to make 5% less pixels (screen area) which is a direct cost saving. You can still market your screen at 13" but make it for less money. The more vendors that go for this cost saving approach, the more you gain from economies of scale which drives down the cost further (or drives up the cost of 16:10). Since people look at screen diagonal over screen area, they are usually none the wiser.