Excellent article on Pittsburgh

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by burghatory

CMU was at the #1 spot during the time when Google decided to open their Pittsburgh office so the article is correct. The looser term "top ranking" means at or near the top-as CMU has been for decades now- but not necessarily occupies the #1 spot. CMU also has a campus in Silicon Valley which probably helped since that is near Google's HQ.

Isn't starting out in a garage or dorm room in the spirit of a high tech start up? Isn't this what the article is about while mentioning various cities where this type of entrepeneurial effort is taking place?

I do agree that not necessarily indicative that with a few start ups here or there means that it's certain to be the next Silicon Valley but the article " Silicon Valley of the East Coast " with New York/ New Jersey being #1 in financial tech start ups is undoubtedly indisputable since that area has the highest concentration of financial/banking services in the nation, as well as being the #1 exporter of these services.

There is very little difference between #1 and #3, I'd agree with that.

Re: the bold, sure, but that happens a lot of places. Steve Jobs did it in California. One company started in a CMU dorm room hardly makes Pittsburgh the next Silicon Valley. What about the Mass Miracle as well? And Research Triange Park, NC?

[LIRefugee]

Try not to think of US and World Report as some sort of final arbiter over which universities are better than others down to individual rankings. Such a notion is ridiculous due subjective measures that invariably get included in such rankings. These rankings, though fairly reliable at a macro level, get highly arbitrary when it comes to determining who is #36 and who is #37, let alone who are 1-5 and in what order. When you take the top ten, it ultimately doesn't matter which you would go to, it's a matter of personal preference or cost or general environment that sets one above another for each individual. CMU being 1 or 3 is irrelevant, what matters is what block of rankings it is in, and CMU has no worries there. Far, far too much attention is paid to individual rankings and I think it glosses over other attributes a school may have that may not factor or work against it in the formula.

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by LIRefugee

Try not to think of US and World Report as some sort of final arbiter over which universities are better than others down to individual rankings. Such a notion is ridiculous due subjective measures that invariably get included in such rankings. These rankings, though fairly reliable at a macro level, get highly arbitrary when it comes to determining who is #36 and who is #37, let alone who are 1-5 and in what order. When you take the top ten, it ultimately doesn't matter which you would go to, it's a matter of personal preference or cost or general environment that sets one above another for each individual. CMU being 1 or 3 is irrelevant, what matters is what block of rankings it is in, and CMU has no worries there. Far, far too much attention is paid to individual rankings and I think it glosses over other attributes a school may have that may not factor or work against it in the formula.

I am well aware of all the above. However, I was responding to a question, "what would you guys say about this" (article). I gave my opinion.