Do people in San Jose consider themselves part of the "Bay Area" (San Francisco: neighborhoods, live in)

[FuturePresident]

I'm just wondering?

Is there such thing as the Bay Area in real life? I mean, San Francisco is always known as the primary city of the Bay Area, but San Jose has a larger population, and always considered Silicon Valley a separate entity than the Bay Area.

Is this right or wrong? You guys aren't a suburb of San Francisco, like Oakland or San Mateo.

[mstnghu2]

San Jose is big enough and has enough of an identity that most people in the South Bay just say they're from San Jose (unless they're from Los Gatos or Saratoga, etc...those people usually like to make it clear that they are not from San Jose). I lived in Milpitas for over 25 years and would just say that I was from San Jose. Now that I live in Newark, I say Bay Area, since Newark doesn't really have an identity of its own.

Once apon a time San Jose could've been considered a suburb of San Francisco, but it hasn't been for a long time. The same could be said for Oakland as well. Oakland tends to be tied more closely to SF in a lot of ways, but I wouldn't really consider Oakland to be a suburb of SF.

San Jose and Silicon Valley are definitely part of the Bay Area. San Jose touches the bay in Alviso. Every county in the region that touches the bay at some point is considered to be a part of the Bay Area. I would actually consider the whole "Silicon Valley" thing more of an outsider's term for the high tech region in the South Bay. From my experience, most people who are from the San Jose area don't say they're from Silicon Valley. Silicon Valley isn't an actual geographic location with defined boundaries and is really more of a frame of mind in the high tech world. The San Francisco Bay Area is an actual geographic location.

[Stephen1110]

1. Oakland is not a suburb of San Francisco

2. The City of San Francisco was named after the San Francisco Bay, not the reverse. The San Francisco Bay Area encompasses the regions of San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose. Thus, the Bay Area is anchored by 3 cities, and not 1.

3. San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose are in the same sphere of influence. San Jose/Silicon Valley is not a separate entity, although one can argue it to be a virtual one, due to it being further south from San Francisco and Oakland.
However, it has nothing to do with San Francisco being the "primary" city, as you describe it, but more to do with pure geographical happenstance.

[Meowen]

San francisco/oakland/san jose are all part of the bay area.

[krudmonk]

Originally Posted by Stephen1110

1. Oakland is not a suburb of San Francisco

2. The City of San Francisco was named after the San Francisco Bay, not the reverse. The San Francisco Bay Area encompasses the regions of San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose. Thus, the Bay Area is anchored by 3 cities, and not 1.

3. San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose are in the same sphere of influence. San Jose/Silicon Valley is not a separate entity, although one can argue it to be a virtual one, due to it being further south from San Francisco and Oakland.
However, it has nothing to do with San Francisco being the "primary" city, as you describe it, but more to do with pure geographical happenstance.

Well said.

[80skeys]

Originally Posted by FuturePresident

I'm just wondering?

Is there such thing as the Bay Area in real life? I mean, San Francisco is always known as the primary city of the Bay Area, but San Jose has a larger population, and always considered Silicon Valley a separate entity than the Bay Area.

Is this right or wrong? You guys aren't a suburb of San Francisco, like Oakland or San Mateo.

If the Bay Area was just San Francisco, then you would just call it "San Francisco", you wouldn't bother saying "Bay Area" right? That answers your question for you.

[mstnghu2]

Originally Posted by 80skeys

If the Bay Area was just San Francisco, then you would just call it "San Francisco", you wouldn't bother saying "Bay Area" right? That answers your question for you.

And, you can always tell when somebody isn't from around here or are a transplant because often times they refer to the whole area as San Francisco. Locals know that only San Francisco is San Francisco and it's a part of the Bay Area.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

This is another one by a troll who has a major chip on his shoulder regarding the West Coast and especially the Bay Area.

Now, here is an item that answers not only the troll's question but also may serve as an argument for merging this forum back with the SF forum:

South King Road, San Jose: Taste of past, present

A nice story about King Road (next hipster zone! watch out folks!).

A story in the Chron about the "new" Eastside. I struggled with which forum to put this in.

The SF forum has at least twice the traffic of this one. Even the SF one is slow at times. There is a certain critical mass necessary to justify a forum.

There is only one Bay Area ... let's have one forum.

[RockyCity]

Its not rocket science, you have a bay and you have cities/towns around it = bay area

[Radical347]

Originally Posted by mstnghu2

And, you can always tell when somebody isn't from around here or are a transplant because often times they refer to the whole area as San Francisco. Locals know that only San Francisco is San Francisco and it's a part of the Bay Area.

So true. One of my friends was telling me that she was thinking of moving to "San Francisco"...and then she tells me about a bunch of neighborhoods in Oakland that she was specifically looking at.