Lindisfarne

Best BY FAR: MSP

They have more shops and restaurants than many small cities. It's like a mall with more upscale eating options. Lots of great areas to sit and people-watch (not on the G-concourse though!) and even a good-sized play area for kids.

The only one who isn't going to like it is people who have problems walking (but there are lots of aids - tram, walking sidewalk, electric carts).

Only complaint: the perfumed soap in the restrooms. I always bring a small travel-sized soap because of this.

BWI, while not the worst, is pretty bad. Few restaurant & shopping options to help you kill time.

Canada Flyer

YVR was a good easy connection.

AMS is great, as others have said.

I've found YYZ to be average. Definately easier if you're staying in one ternimal (especially T1).

DESMOINESguy

Have to agree that LHR is the most dysfunctional airport I've ever negotiated. Last week, my travelling companion (who is prone to air sickness anyway) was made ill by the wild ride we had standing and packed like sardines on the terminal shuttle bus going from 4-3. People were literally being thrown to the floor due to the excessive speed, sharp turns, abrupt starts and stops, etc. And could they possibly map out a more circuitious route between terminals, not to mention the rat maze of corridors inside the terminals? And how many times did we need to go through security? I think I lost count.

Only good thing at LHR is the Holideck Lounge in T4. Truly one of the best lounges I've ever been in, a sanctuary within the LHR chaos.

wahooflyer

Worst I've been to (granted, my travels are almost entirely domestic) is LAS. I was there yesterday for a connection from HP to US and due to construction, the entire A and B gate area is a zoo, with narrow hallways and nowhere near enough seating for passengers on the completely full 757's that are usually departing from said gates. Plus, there's only one newsstand and no food in the immediate gate area.

The easiest airport to transfer through was years ago, at TYS (Knoxville, TN)---not usually a connecting airport, but on the day after New Year's, it happened to be significantly cheaper to fly DL from ATL-TYS-LGA than any nonstop ATL-LGA. The connecting gate was only one door over from where my ATL flight landed, and there were comfortable rocking chairs in the terminal that helped make the hour or so layover go by smoothly. Other than TYS, I like to connect in PIT. Reasonably priced restaurants, a big (though getting shabby) US Airways Club, free Wi-Fi, and a convenient, uncrowded walk between gates.

VA747

I completely agree. MIA is dirty, unfriendly and the most chaotic airport I have ever traveled through. LHR isn't that bad depending on which terminals you're using. MUC is easy and pleasant. CLT is great, but several posters have mentioned the problem of a single airline being so predominant that switching to another airline is difficult....have spent two nights in Charlotte, unable to get out....BWI is good....FCO is much better than it used to be several years ago, but I seem to walk for miles around the place. My pick for best airport is MUC and the worst is MIA.

shisochou

I have had horrible experiences at MIA. When I was 10, my parents and I spent a 13 hour layover at MIA en route to CUN, and we stayed in the airport the entire time. The place was disgusting, and the cleaning people were just rude, more than willing to prattle on loudly right in the presence of weary travellers trying to get some rest. Plus I remember being yelled at by a surly waitress at one of the cafes; she said she wouldn't serve me since I was at the cafe by myself and didn't think I could pay the bill (even though my parents gave me money to eat there beforehand).

On the way back on that same trip, we missed a connection, and had to spend another 9 hours at MIA on standby. Pure hell. Never again.

The last time I was at MIA was 2 years ago, when they were promising renovations. It doesn't surprise me that the situation there still hasn't improved.

schwarm

Another vote for MIA being the worst. I get anxious just thinking about it.

I have avoided LHR and CDG for transfers, partially out of fear. As a *A, I've had reasonably good experiences at MUC. Recently, I have attempted to arrange flights through ZRH but have been unable to do so due to schedules/prices.

For me, a direct flight, if available, trumps *A.

number_6

I completely understand why a lot of people hate MIA, but it also has some good points. Great food in several of the airport restaurants (maybe some of the best airport food in the world). Interesting people watching. And the AA lounges at MIA are quite nice, making this one of the better airports if you have lounge access. Once I even had a haircut at MIA and it was one of the best barbers I've met in my life ... so there is both good and bad at Miami airport. Personally I would rather use MIA than ATL, MCO, TPA, FLL (the closest alternate airports). But a lot of the improvements at MIA are in the past year; it was much worse even a year ago.

77W_12A

Best airports for transit.

HKG
NRT
ZRH

Worst.

LHR!!!!!!!

MegatopLover

Couldn't agree more. The total lack of signs directing pax between terminals, including to the international terminal is extremely frustrating for the un-initiated. The signs for getting to the fancy-schmancy airtrain between the terminals are also particularly bad, and they need to be extra-good since from some piers, like DL's, you've got to go into the parking deck, walk across the spaces, and ride the elevator up to get to the right place. I've since decided that it's much easier to just walk the whole thing. Now, if you know what you're doing, SFO is quite nice, especially the landmark International Terminal. The others could use some updating, but the Int'l is beautiful. A great departure point for a long-haul flight.

EWR has improved a lot with the AirTrain between the terminals and the rail link to Midtown Manhattan. Like SFO, it needs a bit more updating.
ATL looks like a trailer park, desperately in need of good architecture (which the city has managed to foul up pretty effectively in the plans for the new terminal). The compulsory baggage re-check for international arrivals terminating in Atlanta is extremely annoying. Nevertheless, the place is very functional. Given the traffic it handles, it's really quite efficient.
IAD ranks among the lowest awful for that "mobile lounge" bull. It's a bus on stilts, and it's a PITA. The Saarinnen (sp) terminal is beautiful, but the airport itself lacked a master plan for far too long.
LAX is the worst I can think of. Way too small for the number of pax it handles. Tragic overall design with no facilities for connecting between terminals. Nary a penny has been spent on the place since the Olympics in 1984, and it's just plain ugly. TBIT is the armpit of the United States, fairly well the least pleasant place to either arrive or depart.

SIN is hands-down the best, for all of the reasons given by others. Architecture could be improved, and I have hopes for T3.
HKG is a close second, though walking down the piers can take a while and the train has limited utility. HKG's architecture is a huge plus. The place is beautiful in almost every respect.
ICN is up there. The only glitch I've had is the logjam at the security checkpoint for Int'l-Int'l connections. That room at the end of the pier at the foot of the stairs is far too small and too close to the main immigration checkpoints. Also needs better connections to the city, like high-speed rail, but that's under construction.

I've flown into London and elsewhere in Europe, but never connected through any of the majors, so I can't join the anti-Heathrow chorus. For arrivals from and departures to America, I found it quite nice, though that was a while ago.

OnMedic

I may be a bit more limited then many here, but I find the better ones to be: DTW and YYZ (T1)

and the not so good ones to be: LHR and MIA