Canuck_AV8R, I'm not sure what kind of facts you want - but my views on the Seattle product are widely available on this forum. Look at alerting systems, alpha floor protection, rudder design, speedbrake design, Boeing QRH and manuals, for starters.
So far as certification goes, you'd need an engineer to answer the question 'Could the FAA certify the -NG as a new aircraft?', but the answer would come back an emphatic NO, as many standards have shifted so far since the original 737 was certified.
So it's not at all strange that, facing a brand new design (massively costly) or a brief re-jig of an old product (cheap at twice the price) in contemplating what became the -NG, Boeing found a compelling argument to certify the -NG as an add-on to the older aircraft.
The fact is, the -NG, as it should have been built, has been built. It's not perfect, but it leaves the -NG in the dark ages where it belongs. It's called the A320 family.
So far as multi-type Airbus flying goes, no, I am quite comfortable with it, but would need to sit down and have a long conversation with you to explain why. It boils down, in brief, to the type of man/machine interface, and how correct or incorrect reaction between these two elements can influence the outcome of a given set of circumstances, coupled to the likelihood and consequences of an incorrect outcome in the first place. Sorry if that sounds like a 'line' but this is a very complex issue, and one which doesn't lend itself to short postings in a bulletin board.
Happy landings!
[This message has been edited by Portly (edited 01 October 2000).]