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.
First of all, both of these cities have what a lot of cities will never have in terms of geography and topogaphy, climate and natural environments - so these are very unique cities to compare each other to. Vancouver may be the only other city that compares here.
The Myths
Transit
I once heard someone say (or maybe saw this somewhere on CD) that SF is the way of the past and Seattle is the way of the future. A lot of truth there as SF was pioneered on the west coast long before Seattle took off. The city of Seattle has boomed in a way these past 20 years that SF may never experience that rate of growth now or in the future, so comparing these two now may be slanted a bit towards SF since they have the capacity and infastructure already built from yesteryear as Seattle is just now building all of that.
Seattle is breaking ground on the "Big Dig West" (a massive tunnel system replacing our famed Viaduct Elevated Highway) as well as the city's first real mass transit lines and systems. So for people to dismiss Seattle's transit and infastructure at first glance is fololish. Once all of the lines and tunnels and connections are in place, our city transit system will rival that of SF.
Rain
Seattle gets a misty cloud cover and the wetness is not very noticable most of the time as it's a moist sprinkle in the sky and not pouring down rain all of the time. We do have rain sowers like Boston and NY - just not as often.
The Facts
Seattle is a company town. People making the argument about SF being a bigger economic hub are correct since so much government money has been invested into SV and the peninsula since WWII. But look at Seattle and it's suburbs and see if you recognize any of these names:
Boeing
Costco
Microsoft
WaMu (bad example, I guess...now)
Nintendo
T-Mobile
AT&T Wireless
Disney Interactive
Safeco
Clearwire
Weyerhauser
Expedia.com
Match.com
Amazon.com
Nordstroms
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
...and plenty more!
You get the point...Seattle is a tough city to not stay cutting edge and relevant in. When a company from here relocates or moves it usually means either the governement stepped in (JPMorgan buying WaMu) or stronger politicians outsmarted ours (Chicago getting Boeing's corporate offices). This doesn't happen often though.
One more point to be made about our list of wealthiest people around the globe is that we don't get a lot of that New Rich attitude that spoiled certain other metro's (Phoenix, Las Vegas, Dallas, etc.) as a lot of our money goes right into the community and into (education/healthcare)nonprofits.
The only argument for SF over Seattle that I think is valid is the entertainment factor (adults only or family trip) that SF has over Seattle. Again, this comes with population mass so I can't dispute this just as Boston can't dispute NY's better entertainment options, for example.
As for food, both cities have great seafood and tons of good eats. As for tourist attractions - fly out to either city and compare for yourself.
For me the winning factor for Seattle is that it's so much more modern and the buildings (downtown and it's suburbs) are so nice, glassy, shiny, lustful, etc. (Belltown, Bellevue, Downtown) while still keeping a little bit of the grit (Pioneer Square/China Town) Seattle has a great walkable downtown with vibrant nightlife and streetlife all over. The old argument about Seattle being a suburban kinda town is dead -- come see for yourself.
I also like SF's sreetlife although I find it a bit too gritty and shady.
Would I rather live in modern work here/play here/live here transit oriented development in a 20 story glass building or an old home that's been subdivided into small apartments for $1500/month?
That's how I chose Seattle over San Francisco. Well that and the fact that my earlier technology career started in the .Net framework and I could have cared less for JAVA (IMO Microsoft is a better company than SUN, Oracle or Apple).
First of all, both of these cities have what a lot of cities will never have in terms of geography and topogaphy, climate and natural environments - so these are very unique cities to compare each other to. Vancouver may be the only other city that compares here.
In the context of topography+nice urban environment, I tend to agree.
Quote:
Once all of the lines and tunnels and connections are in place, our city transit system will rival that of SF.
However once you've finished all those great projects, SF will have built a bullet train to LA, BART may have ringed the metro area at the southern end of the bay, a subway line may already be up and running to one of our secondary airports(OAK), SFO itself already has a subway station that takes passengers from the terminal to the heart of downtown.
Quote:
Seattle gets a misty cloud cover and the wetness is not very noticable most of the time as it's a moist sprinkle in the sky and not pouring down rain all of the time. We do have rain sowers like Boston and NY - just not as often.
Both have the best kind of summer weather as far as Im concerned. Cool and Sunny.
Quote:
Seattle is a company town. People making the argument about SF being a bigger economic hub are correct since so much government money has been invested into SV and the peninsula since WWII.
The Bay Area is the king of Venture Capital. Period. But even before Silicon Valley, SF was(and still is) the Financial Center of the Western US.
Quote:
But look at Seattle and it's suburbs and see if you recognize any of these names:
Boeing
Costco
Microsoft
WaMu (bad example, I guess...now)
Nintendo
T-Mobile
AT&T Wireless
Disney Interactive
Safeco
Clearwire
Weyerhauser
Expedia.com
Match.com
Amazon.com
Nordstroms
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
...and plenty more!
Boeing is no longer HQed in Seattle, WaMu is now part of Chase(NYC), Nintendo and T-Mobile are actually both foreign corporations, ATT Wireless is a division of an out-of-town company, Disney Interactive is a division of a LA-based company and so on.
As far as local companies that are global name brands-Seattle definitely has a lot for a Metro its size.
You get the point...Seattle is a tough city to not stay cutting edge and relevant in.
In other words, its good to be educated
Adults with a graduate degree
San Francisco Bay Area 789,587(15.9% of the total adult population)
Seattle Metro 340,758(12.3% of the total adult population)
Adults with a bachelor degree
San Francisco Bay Area 1,233,361(24.8% of the total adult population)
Seattle Metro 612,786(22.2% of the total adult population)
It also helps to have an international, cosmopolitan population.
Foreign Born Residents
San Francisco Bay Area 2,150,710(29.6 of the total population)
Seattle Metro 592,596(13.9% of the total population)
And, as far as being on the cutting edge, the bay is hard to beat.
Quote:
One more point to be made about our list of wealthiest people around the globe is that we don't get a lot of that New Rich attitude that spoiled certain other metro's (Phoenix, Las Vegas, Dallas, etc.) as a lot of our money goes right into the community and into (education/healthcare)nonprofits.
Speaking of Wealthiest.
Total Gross Product, 2008
San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA $475.5 Billion
Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA $217.9 Billion
Per Capita GDP, 2008
San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA $65,804
Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA $56,217
Billionaires, 2009
San Francisco Bay 42
Seattle Metro 5
Households Earning $200,000+ Annually
San Francisco Bay 269,175(10.2% of all households)
Seattle Metro 79,064(4.9% of all households)
Quote:
The only argument for SF over Seattle that I think is valid is the entertainment factor (adults only or family trip) that SF has over Seattle. Again, this comes with population mass so I can't dispute this just as Boston can't dispute NY's better entertainment options, for example.
SF is one of the most happening cities in the nation. Seattle too.
[quote]
December 17, 2008 – Eventful - the leading source for local events - today released its second annual ‘Most Eventful Cities’ report, which ranks U.S. cities according to the number and diversity of local events for residents and visitors.
For the second year in a row, Eventful analyzed data for all U.S. cities with a population exceeding 100,000, as well as select cities with smaller populations, examining the quantity and nature of the local events in each market.
As one would expect, major markets like New York, Los Angeles and Chicago held several of the top spots. At the same time, many smaller cities made surprise appearances in the rankings due to unexpectedly large number of events for their size. Seattle jumped from thirteenth place to fifth overall this year thanks to its vibrant music scene and its wealth of outdoor activities. San Francisco, meanwhile, held steady in third place due to its abundance of diverse cultural offerings, strong options for singles and proximity to thousands of acres of open space.[/ QUOTE]
Having lived in both Seattle and SF for at least 5 years each (I currently live in Ballard, have also lived in Capitol Hill, U-District, Central-District, Belltown, and Greenlake!)...
I can say that Seattle is WAY behind San Francisco in terms of infrastructure, transit, cosmopolitanism (is this a word?) and density. Not even close.
The new light rail in Seattle (which is a great start, by the way), wont even put a dent against the BART (one of the largest heavy rail subways in the country), the Muni (an SF-only subway/light rail with 5 lines), CalTrain (connecting to Penninsula, etc.). I dont see how Seattle could ever catch up, frankly.
And, yes, while Seattle is having a lot of condos put up recently (particulalry downtown and in Ballard), condos do not a city vibe make. And outside of downtown it doesnt really have much of a city-vibe. Even Capitol Hill (a neighborhood that borders downtown) cant compare to much further out SF neighborhoods like Lower Haight or the Mission. SF has lots of very dense, urban, VIBRANT neighborhoods. Seattle certainly has its share of some funky, unique, and interesting neighborhoods, but they feel more like cool small-town downtowns (e.g. Fremont, Ballard, Ravenna, even Queen Anne). San Francisco has real CITY neighborhoods.
Also, as someone said SF is an international, cosmopolitan city surrounded by an enormous metropolis. Seattle not so much...And while Seattle has some great restaurants, the food is also not up the "world city" standard that SF is.
In general, SF feels way more alive and vibrant with people out all the time, everywhere, while Seattle is more of a sleepy town with a decent downtown and some cool neighborhood centers.
After all this, I will say I prefer Seattle to live in (hence, why Ive stayed) because it is way more convenient. Costs, parking, laid-back vibe, more space, less crack-heads outside your door, etc...
Although I do miss SF's vibrancy and diversity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandonlee206
First of all, both of these cities have what a lot of cities will never have in terms of geography and topogaphy, climate and natural environments - so these are very unique cities to compare each other to. Vancouver may be the only other city that compares here.
The Myths
Transit
I once heard someone say (or maybe saw this somewhere on CD) that SF is the way of the past and Seattle is the way of the future. A lot of truth there as SF was pioneered on the west coast long before Seattle took off. The city of Seattle has boomed in a way these past 20 years that SF may never experience that rate of growth now or in the future, so comparing these two now may be slanted a bit towards SF since they have the capacity and infastructure already built from yesteryear as Seattle is just now building all of that.
Seattle is breaking ground on the "Big Dig West" (a massive tunnel system replacing our famed Viaduct Elevated Highway) as well as the city's first real mass transit lines and systems. So for people to dismiss Seattle's transit and infastructure at first glance is fololish. Once all of the lines and tunnels and connections are in place, our city transit system will rival that of SF.
Rain
Seattle gets a misty cloud cover and the wetness is not very noticable most of the time as it's a moist sprinkle in the sky and not pouring down rain all of the time. We do have rain sowers like Boston and NY - just not as often.
The Facts
Seattle is a company town. People making the argument about SF being a bigger economic hub are correct since so much government money has been invested into SV and the peninsula since WWII. But look at Seattle and it's suburbs and see if you recognize any of these names:
Boeing
Costco
Microsoft
WaMu (bad example, I guess...now)
Nintendo
T-Mobile
AT&T Wireless
Disney Interactive
Safeco
Clearwire
Weyerhauser
Expedia.com
Match.com
Amazon.com
Nordstroms
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
...and plenty more!
You get the point...Seattle is a tough city to not stay cutting edge and relevant in. When a company from here relocates or moves it usually means either the governement stepped in (JPMorgan buying WaMu) or stronger politicians outsmarted ours (Chicago getting Boeing's corporate offices). This doesn't happen often though.
One more point to be made about our list of wealthiest people around the globe is that we don't get a lot of that New Rich attitude that spoiled certain other metro's (Phoenix, Las Vegas, Dallas, etc.) as a lot of our money goes right into the community and into (education/healthcare)nonprofits.
The only argument for SF over Seattle that I think is valid is the entertainment factor (adults only or family trip) that SF has over Seattle. Again, this comes with population mass so I can't dispute this just as Boston can't dispute NY's better entertainment options, for example.
As for food, both cities have great seafood and tons of good eats. As for tourist attractions - fly out to either city and compare for yourself.
For me the winning factor for Seattle is that it's so much more modern and the buildings (downtown and it's suburbs) are so nice, glassy, shiny, lustful, etc. (Belltown, Bellevue, Downtown) while still keeping a little bit of the grit (Pioneer Square/China Town) Seattle has a great walkable downtown with vibrant nightlife and streetlife all over. The old argument about Seattle being a suburban kinda town is dead -- come see for yourself.
I also like SF's sreetlife although I find it a bit too gritty and shady.
Would I rather live in modern work here/play here/live here transit oriented development in a 20 story glass building or an old home that's been subdivided into small apartments for $1500/month?
That's how I chose Seattle over San Francisco. Well that and the fact that my earlier technology career started in the .Net framework and I could have cared less for JAVA (IMO Microsoft is a better company than SUN, Oracle or Apple).
Hmm...you say you live in Seattle? Surely you could have commented on the Big Dig tunnels and some of Belltown's amenities? I think you liked SF more when you got here to Seattle. SF's a cool place no doubt but I still take Seattle over SF (even if SF is larger) because we get Vancouver a couple hours from us while SF gets to go to Sac and San Jose. No comparisions there as Vancouver can't even be matched by Sac and SJ.
OK - A one hour flight to Vegas, LA or San Diego....none of those options even come close to a trip up to Vancouver. San Diego might be the only of those 3 cities that I would try to compare with SF, Seattle and Vancouver. Certainly not LA or Vegas.
Seattle is beautiful but is not even remotely the city that San fran is. Seattle is a very overrated "city" IMO and is not a real city (by Eastern standards) except for it's downtown area most of the rest is average. Also, too many christmas trees dot the landscape, as my sister says.
This is tough as nail cuz I love both. These are agruably the two best cities on the West Coast
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.
