Laptop Display Question

My wife and I just made a deal - I upgrade my desktop and she gets a laptop.
So, now, as I have just ordered my upgrade components from Newegg, I am
researching laptops. I've got a good idea of the processor type, memory,
hard drive she needs, but I don't know how to evaluate the displays of the
various laptops, and the display is the most important thing to my wife.

Is there anything in the specs that I should be paying most attention to in
order to get the best display? I have seen WXGA, XGA, TFT, wide XGA+,
SXGA+, crystal brite, ultrabrite, trubrite, etc., but there seems to be
nothing quantifiable about the displays that I can use to compare them from
one unit to another.

Also, most laptops seem to tout "wide" screens or at least wide screen
support. If my wife is not going to be watching movies on the laptop (she
isn't), should I stay away from "wide" screens?

Any advice will be appreciated.

Barrabas...

Hello, my turn to add something.
I originally wanted to purchase a 4:3 laptop for compatibility for the
programs
I had known for a number of years. I hate stretching on the screen.
I gave up searching and decided to get a 4:3 external LCD monitor with the
laptop,
which I got for almost half price because it was a display model.

I got a laptop with WSXGA (1680 X 1050). I was surprised to discover with
ATI 1600
graphics that it had the option to maintain aspect ratio, so I could get a
4:3 display with pillar
boxing. This allowed me to get a screen resolution similar to more
computers when I wanted
to compare web pages I made to a 4:3 screen.
My screen also is not the glossy type. I think this is the better option,
though I have only
looked at glossy screens in stores. With the laptop screen, the brightness
varies a lot with the time
of day, with lighting and even how the eyes vary. This took a little bit of
getting used to.

In theory widescreen is just better because it allows a sense of more room,
it seems more like how
one prefers to look at something with their eyes. Because though screens
have been 4:3 for so long,
compatibility with especially computer games becomes hit and miss.

Whenever I attach my 4:3 1024 X 768 screen it seems more limited and less
appealing to spend a lot
of time looking at. But it is usually used for a second monitor.

With a high resolution too, icons and text might appear smaller, I found it
necessary to use large icons.

My impression of glossy screen types, is that they are less prone to washing
out in light.
The problems with them are that you get a mirror effect, similar to looking
in a pool of water.
My impression of them also is that they tend to give a higher contrast. I
don't like high contrast, I like
to get a more even look. This has been an issue with television displays
too for me.

BillW50...

Wow! I am so impressed as you nailed it right on Barrabas! Although I
disagree with you not liking contrast. As the more, the better they are
supposed to be (and higher is usually brighter too). Years ago I
remember ratios like 20:1 and 100:1. You probably would like them. But I
didn't notice things like the glossy screens have more contrast and is
better of not washing out in light. Of course the reflective look is
definitely noticable. And I don't know anybody who likes that except
women who wants to put on makeup. ;)