My 2 cents...
Airbus: Sidestick is fantastic (as has been written before on PPRune), but why in hell did the Airbus engineers not link the sticks mechanically?? As an example, small airplane such as the Varieze or Longeze variety have been flying for more than 20 years (... + wearing winglets...) with mechanically linked sidesticks. Airbus could have incorporated all its electronic gadgetry and still link the sticks together.
As for the Autothrottle, well I prefer to refer to as Semi-autothrottle... On most jets of the category you arm the A/T before T/O and, if all works ok, disengage it after landing. Not so on the bus, it is automatic, but you have to juggle it around during climb out and prior to T/D.
On the bus, piloting is more akin to a constant analysis of all presented parameters than real flying. As a pilot I get the feeling just being an invited guest
Boeing: Well I can't help it but have a feeling of "déjà vu" in a Boeing. These ships are old fashionned (the 777 probably being the exception). Let's look at the 737: Starting ouside, you get the nose of the 720 (only short of 50 years old), no main landing gear doors, a tail festonned with VGs (surely no credit for the aerodynamic shape of the rear fuselage), sideways taxiing (good thing they fly more or less straight!). The FDK, well, is also strongly reminiscent of passed times, even in the latest versions. Just look at the lenght of the switches on the overhead or the gear lever: Is this a fine flying craft or a disposed of steam locomotive? The control column itself can only have been crafted by some eager farmer, reminiscent of some cattle horn
Now you might ask, what is the solution?
IMHO the better solution (according our macho human considerations) would be something of a cross between Airbus and Boeing, some electronic gadgetry, linked sticks, a full A/T, etc.
Thinking of it what a pity they don't manufacture those Fokker 100... Scaled up that would have been one fine combination of engineering and flying pleasure
