U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-28-2013, 07:05 PM
 
2,426 posts, read 3,619,863 times
Reputation: 1453

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ragincajun82 View Post
Dallas is more manageable than Chicago. Really depends on what you're looking for in a city. The areas outside of Dallas are definitely more family friendly and affordable (Plano, Frisco, McKinney).

In Dallas you have Victory Park which is very high end with lots of clubs and nightlife.
Victory Park

They've also extended the DART Rail System in Dallas.
DART.org - DART Rail System
DART.org - DART Rail System Map


My Ranking:

Weather: Dallas
Affordability: Dallas
Economy/Jobs: Dallas
Low Crime: Dallas
Infrastructure: Dallas
Food: Tie
Nightlife: Tie
Traffic: Tie
Scenery: Chicago
Outdoors/Recreation: Chicago
Museums: Chicago
Infrastructure you give it to Dallas?! Chicago's is above and beyond Dallas'.

Food Tie?! Dallas doesn't even crack the top 5 in the country, but Chicago does. I can name 10 cities with better food than Dallas: NYC, Chicago, SF, LA, Houston, New Orleans, Miami, D.C, San Diego, Atlanta. Heck Dallas doesn't even crack the top 10.

Nightlife Dallas? Really? Chicago has one of the best nightlifes in the country. Easily goes after NYC, Miami and Vegas.

Obviously you have NEVER been to Chicago.

Nightlife Tie?! What are you smoking.

More manageable? Dallas 385 square miles. Chicago is 234 square miles and Dallas has half the population of Chicago. Chicago is much easier to get around in and much quicker too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-28-2013, 08:00 PM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,391 posts, read 24,555,922 times
Reputation: 5662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicagoist123 View Post
Infrastructure you give it to Dallas?! Chicago's is above and beyond Dallas'.

Food Tie?! Dallas doesn't even crack the top 5 in the country, but Chicago does. I can name 10 cities with better food than Dallas: NYC, Chicago, SF, LA, Houston, New Orleans, Miami, D.C, San Diego, Atlanta. Heck Dallas doesn't even crack the top 10.

Nightlife Dallas? Really? Chicago has one of the best nightlifes in the country. Easily goes after NYC, Miami and Vegas.

Obviously you have NEVER been to Chicago.

Nightlife Tie?! What are you smoking.

More manageable? Dallas 385 square miles. Chicago is 234 square miles and Dallas has half the population of Chicago. Chicago is much easier to get around in and much quicker too.
Chicago blows away Dallas for infrastructure food and nightlife, not closeeeee.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 06:42 AM
 
Location: Willowbend/Houston
13,403 posts, read 21,185,677 times
Reputation: 10279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicagoist123 View Post
Infrastructure you give it to Dallas?! Chicago's is above and beyond Dallas'.

Food Tie?! Dallas doesn't even crack the top 5 in the country, but Chicago does. I can name 10 cities with better food than Dallas: NYC, Chicago, SF, LA, Houston, New Orleans, Miami, D.C, San Diego, Atlanta. Heck Dallas doesn't even crack the top 10.

Nightlife Dallas? Really? Chicago has one of the best nightlifes in the country. Easily goes after NYC, Miami and Vegas.

Obviously you have NEVER been to Chicago.

Nightlife Tie?! What are you smoking.

More manageable? Dallas 385 square miles. Chicago is 234 square miles and Dallas has half the population of Chicago. Chicago is much easier to get around in and much quicker too.
I think you're just talking out of frustration. I'm not brash enough to say that Dallas can compete with Chicago on infrastructure, food, or nightlife, it can't. But frankly Dallas' food is better than at least three of the cities you mention and if you are a car creature Dallas is more manageable.

It's all in the eye of the beholder.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 08:19 AM
 
2,426 posts, read 3,619,863 times
Reputation: 1453
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterlemonjello View Post
I think you're just talking out of frustration. I'm not brash enough to say that Dallas can compete with Chicago on infrastructure, food, or nightlife, it can't. But frankly Dallas' food is better than at least three of the cities you mention and if you are a car creature Dallas is more manageable.

It's all in the eye of the beholder.
But overall it's not more manageable than Chicago. That's the thing, if you have a car in Chicago you manage just fine same as if you don't have a car. Also everything is closer so if you are driving it's easier to get to/quicker.

For example if I want to go party in River North I can easily drive there or go outside my apartment hail a taxi or walk 5 minutes to the train and take it there. In Dallas you really only have the option to drive, which to me is not manageable. What happens if your car gets totaled? Gas prices skyrocket? To me being more manageable is meaning that I have many options to get around with ease, not that I am forced to live one way.

And yes I know Dallas has public transportation, but let's be frank, it would suck to have to solely rely on that to get around.

Chicago is more manageable as you have the easy options to walk to places, easily take public transportation or easily drive to places.

Last edited by Chicagoist123; 07-29-2013 at 09:25 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 08:37 AM
 
1,634 posts, read 2,200,566 times
Reputation: 541
Weather: Chicago (hot summers, cold snowy winters, crispy springs and cool autumns...Gotta love the 4 seasons.)
Affordability: Dallas
Economy/Jobs: I'd split this and say... Economy: Chicago. Jobs: Dallas.
Crime/Safety: Dallas
Infrastructure: Chicago, and it's not close.
Food: Chicago is a top 5 food city in North America. Dallas is not.
Nightlife: Chicago.
Traffic: Dallas.
Scenery: Chicago (the loop, the architecture, the parks, the lakefront etc.)
Outdoors/Recreation: Chicago.
Museums: Chicago.
Cost of Living: Dallas.
Public Transportation: Chicago.



Chicago wins for me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Milwaukee
1,314 posts, read 1,736,634 times
Reputation: 946
Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico View Post
midwest1, I've been to many areas around people in Chicago said I should go to over the last decade, frankly I have been unimpressed. I just don't really bother anymore. When I want nature (though I'm not a huge nature person) I fly somewhere else like to Denver or down to Florida to see family and friends. They are the quickest bang for your buck for real nature (either beaches) or . I've even tried to get some people to come to Florida with me to visit for a vacation and they respond like, "why should I go to Florida, we have beaches right here!" And I look at them like they are crazy b/c they seem to not know the difference. I was literally MAD once when I wasted time going to one of the "forest preserves" with somebody. Great there are trees and not farms, not really impressive. While it is "outside" and you can walk around and see trees or whatever, it is not very scenic at least to me. It's just not an outdoorsy place, not many people are into outdoors in Chicago either. Go to Denver, Seattle, SF, LA, Carolinas, New England, etc. and you will see a dramatic difference in the culture of people who are actually into the outdoors. I'm talking like going on hikes or mountain biking, skiing every weekend type people. Though I grew up in Florida and know what amazing beaches and lush tropical areas look like, and also lived in Northern California and know what amazing coast lines and dramatic mountains and true "forest preserves" look like... so, it's just not impressive to me. No amount of stuff you post in threads is going to change that. I certainly don't think Dallas is great either.
Are you driving halfway to Rockford and hitting a roadside county park? Every interesting area is north of you. Go up Michigan's western shore, up Wisconsin's eastern shore, Upper Michigan, Wisconsin northwoods, Wisconsin/IA/MN driftless, etc. As someone who has spent a lifetime in the areas I just mentioned, I know for a fact that the bolded text above is 100% false: Illinois (i.e., Chicagoland) license plates clog up Wisconsin and Michigan 6 months out of the year, and leave a significant footprint (snowmobiling, skiing, fishing, etc.) the rest. Get a house on one of Wisconsin's/Minnesota's 25,000+ lakes and a good % of your neighbors are from Chicago; go hunting in the northwoods and you'll see deer lying across tons of vehicles with IL plates; or go to Door County, where I'm from, and over half the plates and well over half the thousands of cottages are Chicagoland.

Door County: http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u...-Bluffs-DC.jpg
Wisconsin Driftless: http://www.travelwisconsin.com/uploa...nretouched.jpg
Western Michigan: http://sleepingbeardunes.com/blog/wp...eline_WWPW.jpg
Upper Michigan: http://pixdaus.com/files/items/pics/...00c9_large.jpg
Wisconsin northwoods: http://www.phonebookoftheworld.com/u...hill-view4.jpg
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 10:54 AM
 
Location: Willowbend/Houston
13,403 posts, read 21,185,677 times
Reputation: 10279
Quote:
Originally Posted by CowsAndBeer View Post
Are you driving halfway to Rockford and hitting a roadside county park? Every interesting area is north of you. Go up Michigan's western shore, up Wisconsin's eastern shore, Upper Michigan, Wisconsin northwoods, Wisconsin/IA/MN driftless, etc. As someone who has spent a lifetime in the areas I just mentioned, I know for a fact that the bolded text above is 100% false: Illinois (i.e., Chicagoland) license plates clog up Wisconsin and Michigan 6 months out of the year, and leave a significant footprint (snowmobiling, skiing, fishing, etc.) the rest. Get a house on one of Wisconsin's/Minnesota's 25,000+ lakes and a good % of your neighbors are from Chicago; go hunting in the northwoods and you'll see deer lying across tons of vehicles with IL plates; or go to Door County, where I'm from, and over half the plates and well over half the thousands of cottages are Chicagoland.

Door County: http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u...-Bluffs-DC.jpg
Wisconsin Driftless: http://www.travelwisconsin.com/uploa...nretouched.jpg
Western Michigan: http://sleepingbeardunes.com/blog/wp...eline_WWPW.jpg
Upper Michigan: http://pixdaus.com/files/items/pics/...00c9_large.jpg
Wisconsin northwoods: http://www.phonebookoftheworld.com/u...hill-view4.jpg
You could make the same arguements for Dallas. Drive up the road into Oklahoma and youre in the Ozarks which are equally beautiful to some of the places in Wisconsin.

Having lived in Chicago and Dallas, I have to say neither city is great for outdoor activities. You have the lake in Chicago and several lakes in Dallas, but they arent exactly California, Florida, or the Mountain West. Chicago is pancake flat and Dallas is not quite flat, but not exactly hilly either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 11:04 AM
 
Location: Willowbend/Houston
13,403 posts, read 21,185,677 times
Reputation: 10279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicagoist123 View Post
But overall it's not more manageable than Chicago. That's the thing, if you have a car in Chicago you manage just fine same as if you don't have a car. Also everything is closer so if you are driving it's easier to get to/quicker.

For example if I want to go party in River North I can easily drive there or go outside my apartment hail a taxi or walk 5 minutes to the train and take it there. In Dallas you really only have the option to drive, which to me is not manageable. What happens if your car gets totaled? Gas prices skyrocket? To me being more manageable is meaning that I have many options to get around with ease, not that I am forced to live one way.

And yes I know Dallas has public transportation, but let's be frank, it would suck to have to solely rely on that to get around.

Chicago is more manageable as you have the easy options to walk to places, easily take public transportation or easily drive to places.
Its just how you plan to get around. Driving in Chicago sucks. I hated anytime I had to get my car out. Parking is super expensive and getting through the streets is awful. So I strongly disagree that it is easy to drive.

It is easier to walk and take public transit in Chicago no doubt, but it is far easier to drive in Dallas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 11:06 AM
 
Location: Milwaukee
1,314 posts, read 1,736,634 times
Reputation: 946
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterlemonjello View Post
You could make the same arguements for Dallas. Drive up the road into Oklahoma and youre in the Ozarks which are equally beautiful to some of the places in Wisconsin.

Having lived in Chicago and Dallas, I have to say neither city is great for outdoor activities. You have the lake in Chicago and several lakes in Dallas, but they arent exactly California, Florida, or the Mountain West. Chicago is pancake flat and Dallas is not quite flat, but not exactly hilly either.
I agree, just responding to the direct quote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2013, 11:36 AM
 
2,426 posts, read 3,619,863 times
Reputation: 1453
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterlemonjello View Post
Its just how you plan to get around. Driving in Chicago sucks. I hated anytime I had to get my car out. Parking is super expensive and getting through the streets is awful. So I strongly disagree that it is easy to drive.

It is easier to walk and take public transit in Chicago no doubt, but it is far easier to drive in Dallas.
It's not that hard to drive in Chicago. With the exception of downtown, Chicago is pretty easy to get around by car. Now if you take the highway everywhere that is a different story, but streetwise, traffice outside of rush hour is not bad at all.

And your statement is not true. In areas like Irving Park, Portage Park or Jefferson Park it's actually easier to drive than to take public transportation or walk.

Driving in Chicago is not that bad
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top