FD - we haven't yet fully rid the 400 of ALL the leftover commonality SOPs from the days of the 200/300, so the checklist still needs to shrink a whole lot.
However, I have to agree entirely with fokker's comments, and in reply to MOR, indeed the aircraft is not built well, but then again nothing that is manufactured (cars, boats, planes etc) on that side of the Atlantic ever is. As far as reliability is concerned, I stand by earlier comments about being familiar with aircraft. It's a computer-driven aircraft, and things absolutely have to be done in a logical order or, just like your average PC, it will throw a wobbly. In 3 years of flying the 400 I have had only one technical failure (starter genny) that has led to a flight being cancelled or significantly delayed.
Guys like FD who have progressed to Airbus types will no doubt attest to the fact that the 400 was a very useful stepping stone. I standby now for comments about jet time and progression to airlines such as Virgin, but that has more to do with adding an extra hurdle to the selection process than actual jet experience.