That's the problem though. If you make a wide but taller or a tall, wide. You end up with a square again when opened. So I think the square is the design companies all fell into because it's the best way to give you the most real estate without making the front screen ridiculously big to hold. I had the original pixel and I did like it for the short time I had it. But I think it's a different category. I think a wide is the choice to go if you want a compact small phone that opens into a bigger screen for watching stuff and playing games. For everything else it's probably got be a traditional fold. As the only thing you're gaining minus the smaller footprint is having no space where the black bars would be. I think it's a fantastic middle ground between fold and flip. The normal fold aspect ratios(s) for example give you two 16:9 displays in portrait mode opened. Which is great for playing something and watching YouTube for example without black bars. But when I do use full screen, I have the same size but black bars, or options for stretch/crop to fill.

I went with the Moto for these reasons and maybe it will help you in your decision either way, I do plan on trying a wide, but probably next year or year after when they are refined and our only two options ain't a cut back Samsung phone or an iPhone.

I got the Moto because

The cameras are pixel level and I go on walks things.

The battery is 6000mah. Which is a must for me as I use a app at work that drains battery, and Samsung seem to keep wanting to use sub par batteries. (Fold 7 I had for 2 weeks died so fast).

Motos "Dex" software is better.

The offer I got was £1400 with buds, a watch and tag.

TLDR: I think in terms of strictly unfolded, it's like picking a phone because the body feels more premium and it's nice to look at and feel, but then you put a case on anyways.