I'll chime in to also agree that a properly raster-squeezed 4:3 set has the potential to be as good as a 16:9 set. An argument for this is the fact that all CRTs are native 4:3, and 16:9 sets only ever use the center portion of the phosphor surface.
There are, however, some more subtle considerations: (there has been a more detailed discussion of this in hometheaterforum), but my understanding is that the electronics that generate the electron beam raster trace in 16:9 sets can be more optimized to perform in the 16:9 window (e.g. focus, tighter beam size) if they don't ever have to "open up" and perform the 4:3 raster trace. Conversely, 4:3 sets have to do both raster aspects, and the electronics are tuned as a best compromise between two optimal settings.
--Gerald C
------------------
STOP DVI/HDCP!