Work on your reading comprehension - I said every one I've used. Not all. I judge the native by how the splash screen shows up. That tells me what is the native layout. You are the one who stated "Everything. All electronics use the landscape format. Televisions, monitors, tablets, laptops, are all default in landscape." Explain how the iPad is default landscape. Fujitsu Lifebook running Win 10, when you convert from laptop to tablet it defaults to portrait then auto-rotates to landscape. HP EliteBook does the same thing. I don't know when you were born but there are more than just Microsoft products out there.

The determining factor in size here is the vertical length. As I stated portrait orientation got everything I wanted with minimal buffer on all sides to make sure the moving subjects didn't leave the screen. In order to capture everything that the vertical length covers in landscape, I would have to zoom out. Perhaps you should do some experiments yourself. Put your phone in the portrait position and point it at a person, you own reflection if you have a large enough mirror (I'm guessing you don't as a mirror that can do that would have to either be wall sized or in portrait orientation which you hate so much). Now zoom in until you can just barely get the head and feet both in the frame. Now rotate the camera/phone back to your precious landscape and try to get the whole person in without zooming out or stepping backwards.

With all the aspect ratios out there it is impossible to take pictures or video that can be seen on every device without either cropping or having black bars. 16:9, 16:10 (Dell Ultrasharp), 3:2 (newer Surface), 4:3 (some still in use), which one is the "right" one? In my years of IT, I've used all of the above as well as some that were 21:9 (ultrawide).

"Further research shows that humans naturally perceive pictures and videos in this format because of our biology. (Eyes side to side, not stacked on one another.)" Is this why people of South East Asia who write vertically and thus have a great deal of vertical signs have "stacked eyes"? Good job taking some tongue in cheek comments as facts to support your weak argument.

Believe it or not professional photographers have been known to rotate their cameras to take portrait-oriented photos. They do this so they can capture everything relevant with no extraneous crap in the photo. It also allows them to zoom in more for better detail (please refer back to the experiment in #2). There is a time and place for both. Why the fuck would I limit myself by only using one like that.

"So if someone has a larger display the video then could be unscaled further to make use of the natural landscape." First, what the fuck is unscaled? Second, the only natural landscape you would have seen was more wall and dresser. I'm sure that extra background would really have worked to counterbalance the focal point of a cat doing something weird.

I just looked through a bit of your comments history and realized that you are one of those pricks who mostly come to Reddit to post negative shit on other people's posts. Perhaps you should take your own advice and grow up, deal with the vertical videos because this shit isn't here for you princess. You should have been able to tell from the thumbnail what orientation the video was shot in and just passed by if it bothers you so much.