But Andrew/digital dog said above that w/ srgb images, the aRGB might actually be a disadvantage?
What I said (more or less) is both an sRGB and Wide Gamut are ideal, that if you do a lot of very subtle color correction work on lower gamut images, it will be easier to see these subtle differences on a lower gamut unit.
Think of the two displays as a balloon with 16.7 million dots on them. They represent the colors each can reproduce. One is half inflated (sRGB), the other is twice as inflated (Adobe RGB (1998)). The colorimetric space between the dots in the Adobe RGB display is twice the distance. The differences between R123/G45/B90 and R123/G46/B90 has a higher deltaE value. Is this an issue? It depends on what you're doing and if it is really important to SEE the differences in one value in green in this instance.
If you spend all day working on brides in white wedding dresses, and you need very fine visual separation of colors, an sRGB display is going to be easier to see these values. If you work on more saturated work, then you probably do want to see the extra saturated colors provided in the wide gamut display.
So for the price of an Eizo, get a 2490 and 2690 for probably the save money, work with a dual display. Profile each using the same excellent SpectraView II software and one puck. Use the smaller sRGB display for palettes but when you want to see the differences on subtle images, drag it over to the 2490. Best of both worlds, you might even save some $$.