I've also seen some of the 16:9 tubes (including the 38" RCA you saw, Lena) and been enthralled. The reasons I don't have one currently? Money (trying to minimize home theater investments in order to afford a bigger house), long-term HD compatibility and features (every time I start reading up on direct-view and rear-projection HD, I get wary of the current options), and aspect ratio (I'd love to go 16:9, but my wife watches a lot of TV and so 4:3 is a more useful aspect ratio for the time being). A lot of people feel differently than I do about rear-projection, but I have always preferred direct view; the screen will be smaller, but a really good tube can look wonderful. Rear projection is also larger than Mrs. Gonk wants in her living room, so that's one more reason to stay with direct view. Interesting point I heard recently -- a 40" 4:3 tube that is HD capable (Sony makes some, and I think there are others) has the same 16:9 viewing area as a 34" 16:9 display, give or take an inch, but offers a lot more for 4:3 TV watching. I will probably get an HD-compatible set after we move (next year, if all goes well), dont know if it will be 4:3 or 16:9 but it will most likely be direct view.

If you are thinking of going with a direct-view set in the future, you might look at the cabinet dimensions for a 40" 4:3 TV and a 34" or 36" 16:9 set (they should be similar width) as well as the RCA 38" (although I've read some less complementary reviews of the RCA). If I get a new entertainment center before a new TV, that will be my approach (space for 40" 4:3 or a 34" 16:9).

Having made my pro-direct view comments, I will say that rear projection has come a long way in recent years, and 16:9 HD RPTV's have become pretty reasonably priced as well as offering very good pictures (especially if you watch a lot of DVD's). Benjamin's got a very nice one with his Mitsu (my little 27" TV is one of the last direct-view sets that Mitsu made, and I love it -- just wish it had component video inputs).

------------------
Gonk