Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll go with Seattle because everytime I go to Seattle I tend to also visit Portland and Vancouver as well. Atlanta is okay, but I honestly think there could be more to do there for the size of the city.
I'll go with Seattle because everytime I go to Seattle I tend to also visit Portland and Vancouver as well. Atlanta is okay, but I honestly think there could be more to do there for the size of the city.
Haven't spent a WHOLE lot of time in Atlanda. I liked what I saw there - but I LOVE Seattle. Visited a friend there last year and really, really enjoyed myself. Seriously considered moving there for a while, even. I'd vacation there again in a heartbeat.
People do vacation in Atlanta and I've done it. I went for a concert but stayed the weekend. I'm sure that Atlanta gets lots of weekend trips like that. Seattle may as well.
As for which I'd rather, I've never been to Seattle so that's near the top of my list. I think that there'd be lots more to do in Atlanta that would interest me although I'd prefer Seattle's weather. So Seattle.
Seattle, hands down. I love Atlanta, but it's not particularly visitor friendly. If you can find a local to show you around, you'll probably have a good time (and many locals don't really know much of the city either, to be honest). There's actually a lot of cool stuff in Atlanta, but it's hidden away in the city's various nooks and crannies. Atlanta has a nice hinterland with more attractions than it gets credit for (a 700' tall cascade is within the MSA, for instance), but it can't compete with Seattle.
Seattle is far more open with its charms. Downtown is bustling and the city has several great waterfronts, and it has some great nationally-known attractions. Plus the surroundings are some of the more beautiful areas in the country.
Atlanta's main tourism focus isn't to attract vacationers. It's to make the city pleasant and entertaining to visit for the hordes of people who find themselves coming to Atlanta for a specific purpose (work, sports, conventions, etc). It's improving, without a doubt, but still has a ways to go. All in all, Seattle is simply a better tourist destination, I think most would agree.
Seattle. If you're going to go on vacation to a city, for the sake of being in a city, you ought to choose one where you can actually walk around and take the bus. Atlanta's sprawled out all to hell, you might as well visit Houston or Phoenix. Hell, I'm even reluctant to recommend my own hometown of L.A. for that reason alone.
No contest lol. Seattle is a real city with real urban neighborhoods and vibrancy...Atlanta well yeah....if you like suburbs, you came to the right city.
No contest lol. Seattle is a real city with real urban neighborhoods and vibrancy...Atlanta well yeah....if you like suburbs, you came to the right city.
Right, because Atlanta doesn't have real urban neighborhoods and Seattle doesn't have suburbs...
Seattle's a more interesting city and the climate is less swamp-ass. Also its not segregated the way Atlanta is. Atlanta's a great town, but there are better cities in the ol' south, like Nashville and NOLA.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
