Mmm...That depends.All of this true, but you and all would have to admit, if Henry's long term goals were, rather than attempt to conquer all of France and instead push for an enlarged Aquitaine, or something of similar capacity to the Brétigny treaty, then I'd say the English would be better off in the long haul prestige-wise.
On the bright side, it would be relativly easy to get these without real costs, and it would probably turns out as Henry would be the clear vaniquisher of this war (Let's say Lancastrian war).
If he manages to keep Bourguignons and Armagnacs at each other throats (a bit like Edward III let Charles the Bad acting of its own), that's still a good benefit.
That said, with the traditionnal attitude of aquitain vassals (going from not giving a shit, and searching support from Valois) and especially if your super-Aquitaine does include Armagnac lands; it's not going to be that easy to manage. The lack of raids, energies and ressources being devoted to stabilisation, would be a problem as Henry V would have to deal more with Parliment.
Eventually, when war will broke out again, Henry V is gonna have an Edward III-like treatment as "Why didn't you took all of France as you claim it, it would have been easy and we won't be in trouble now".
So, on short term, yes it would have a relativly good press. At middle term, it would be seen as the financial and ressource gap it was since Edward III.
I could see multiple Calais-like holdings after a second Caroline Phase, (especially on Gascony), and the pursuing of raids up to the late XVth century.Then again, assuming that France has similar population growths as OTL, I can probably say without a doubt that Aquitaine would not stay English for long.