Allow me to try to steer this discussion into more diverse waters by saying people are way too much focusing on the fuselages of both planes, whereas there are other domains which are worth some attention.
The reason there is so much focus on the 'coffee pot' look of the 787 is that Boeing's PR
department has done a good job (at least the second time round) in finding the technological differentiators they were ordered to focus on to promote the 787 as being truly state-of-the-art in an efford to restore confindence in their capabilities after the 767-4ER and Sonic Cruiser fiascos. They first tried the bleedless engine concept (which in fact isn't bleedless at all) because they felt engines would be most easily seen as centers of technological improvement, yet that attempt failed and they then changed their attention to the so called "monolithic" carbon fuselage barrels which are in fact far from monolithic either, but contrary to the "bleedless engines" there are no closely involved neutral partners like on the engines to shoot that hot air balloon out of the air and so it has caught on with the public.
Whereas the 787 definitely has a very innovative fuselage design, the overall advantages of it having a barrel approach over the shell approach are greatly overrated as they are very very modest (not even a single percentage point in OEW and be assured once the maintenance procedures for the XWB will be finished also in maintenance costs), yet there are other domains of the 787 design where there definitely was room for Boeing to make more use of the latest technological innovations, the WINGS being one of them.
Boeing obviously likes to put the spotlight on its new fuselage design, yet it have been clear by now they remain very quite over their wing design and allow me to give away the reason for that: it is because the 787 has a very conventional wing design.
Airbus superiority when it comes do designing wings is known for long (Concorde wing, A320 wing, A330/A340 common design, A380 wing), so Boeing took the safest way with the innovation used for the 787 and went as far as possible with it, hence the barrel approach for the composite fuselage: nice, but non essential really when you know that an innovative wing design is much more essential to a plane. In the end, the first task of a plane is not to be efficiently maintained, but to fly efficiently and that can more easily be done on innovative wings, not on innovative fuselages.... However, you have to be capable to choose the domain you innovate on...
As more of the XWB's design and its all composite wing will become known, people will come to understand that Airbus has not only done a trade off study on barrel vs shell, but also looked at the wider picture to see whether it wouldn't be wiser to try to break into new grounds through the wing design and opt for a slightly less challenging fuselage design.