Sure it's suitable. It's just not profitable to make such monitors because
1) People want the highest number possible and
2) When the highest possible costs too much, they go with that they know, and thanks to advertising and home video people got the message that "Full HD" is awesome and since "Full HD" is 16:9, they thus rejected 16:10 because it's not advertised as heavily and is thus not that awesome.

So, yeah, we had computer monitors at 1280x960, 1280x1024, and 1600x1200 - and then "HD Ready" appeared from the home video market with 1280x720 and everyone went "Wow it's HD, it's awesome, we must get that!".

16:10 monitors were never very common, and so seem "weird", so I guess people don't trust them as if it's just trying to one-up the 16:9 ratio - like stores claiming to be open 25/7.

EDIT: Then again, I never quite got the 4:5 ratio, but 1280x1024 became much more popular than 1280x960. I also don't understand 21:9, possibly a marketing gimmick (it's a lot more than 16:9!).

I'm sure it has more to do with the format of video and mass production of panels.
What's not to understand? You don't care for a wider panel, some other people do. Also, you can watch 21:9 movies on it without black bars. Not that I have an 21:9 myself - 16:9 is wide enough for me.

And production of 16:10 computer monitors decreased because purchases of them decreased, because people were awed by the "HD" branding of television monitors despite those resolutions (primarily 1280x720 at the time, with only higher-end models having 1920x1080) being lower than many concurrent computer monitors (which I mentioned before).

That was a jab at myself, showing that I'm not all too dissimilar from the people thinking 16:10/8:5 is/was weird or blindly followed marketing in that I prefer with what I'm familiar with.

What a bizarre design choice. Why anyone would want that is beyond me.

SAME HERE! humble brag, I got a P2715Q 4k IPS monitor and it's response time is 9 and HELL I never noticed a difference from the 6ms from my old dell 27 inch 1080p PLS monitor. The color is some of the most accurate shit I ever seen when it comes to monitors. it even has better color then ASUS $1.400 dollar monitors. and it was like what $700 I paid for.

makes games look pretty and pop out with how the colors should look like.

Mine is too ancient to recommend but I do love having a "1200p" monitor and will do everything in my power to get another one when the time comes. 1080 is too wide and removes max res for a lot of old 4:3 games.

Precisely! Colour and everything else aside, this is the top reason I wanted 1920x1200. You can play all the early 2000s games that had a resolution of 1600x1200 pixel-perfectly with black bars on side. Ditto for 800x600 older games, that can be done by a simple 2 to 1 pixel conversion without any complex scaling.