Having now surpassed 1000 hours on the B777 my position remains unchanged apart from constant back pain and dry/red eyes from the airflow.
In the Bus every air vent had a sliding 'on/off' control which apart from controlling the airflow had a direct impact on the noise level in the cockpit. The Boeing has no such controls and the cockpit is (as a result) far noisier and less conducive to: a) rest, and b) a satisfactory working environment.
If anyone has developed and/or sourced air vent 'plugs' that we could insert into the knee/side table/#2 window vents please PM me and I will buy them; otherwise I will tape them over on each flight.
I understand the reason for the airflow is to create an over-pressure in the cockpit compared to the cabin behind the cockpit door...and it is bollocks.
One further point to come out of a miserable thousand hours flying this airplane is the CG setting on the init perf page. What does it actually mean? It's preset at 30% for 300 and 7.5% for 300ER but what does it do? Unless the CG is 30 or 7.5% it's a nonsense! Airbus CG changes with fuel burn off and it compensates for it; change in fuel load in the Boeing has minimal effect on CG. 7.5% on ER is for alleged vibration but I have yet to encounter that. Changing CG upwards increases opt and max altitudes on the FMC and clearly the wings and engines (the most powerful engines ever on a civilian airliner) can handle it. If you have a (not unusual scenario) of an ocean crossing with little or no chance of an optimum altitude with 7.5% preset, change to anything higher (30-40%) and perhaps get your altitude. Normal CG is probably between 30 and 40 anyway.
The Boeing airframe is ok; put an airbus cockpit into it and keep the electronic checklist and it would be a good ship