I think that's it.

I've used both, and the switch from 16:9 to 16:10 was a regression. Way too much vertical cramping (and other dumb stuff, like fat bezels). I've switched back to 16:10 to the greatest degree possible.

4:3 to 16:10 was an actual improvement, because it gave more space for sidebar stuff. I'm curious if 3:2 would be a better compromise than 16:10, but I haven't had the chance to use a monitor like that.