Just flew. Technology pretty neat, seats same - narrow and uncomfortable. OK for three to four hour domestic, would be pretty bad to Europe and bad on long haul Pacific, still vastly inferior to Singapore Air, Virgin Atlantic and less comfortable than Air France, Emirates.. Folk who fly long and regularly will notice. Unclear what the Jeff fuss over the plane is all about -- nobody who flys regularly will want to be on it for any length of time, new and uncomfortable, old and uncomfortable, same deal. Must have something to do with cost base, nothing better for the pesky passengers.
There was some post here that was taken down about electrical issues on this aircraft, don't know but while boarding heard pilots discussing electrical problems and how many to overlook before delaying. I didn't know you were able to overlook plane problems.
The only way to fly international is in Business/First Class. Try paying $12K for one of those. The 787 does have a Business section which includes fold downs just in case you have the cashola to afford such amenities.
The 787 is over rated for the most part IMHO but give kudos to UAL for being the first US airline who have them (3) in service. The GPS system in this aircraft is the best on the planet. This aircraft can land (safely) in zero visibility if it has to. I flew in the 787 from ORD-IAH this week and it's better all around than the 767. And of course its fuel consumption is very good.
The electrical problems were not with the generator as first thought.
You stated you over heard the pilots talking about such events? How did you get in the cockpit?