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 visited Boston for the first time a little over a year ago (and I was actually an Atlanta resident at the time) and enjoyed it; I stayed with a friend who showed me around. I just wish the nightlife were more exciting but I liked seeing the city from both a visitor's and resident's perspective. Next time I'll have to visit in the summer.
That's true, if you come to Boston to blow off some steam and have fun, you'll be sorely disappointed. Discounted alcohol drinks (happy hour) are illegal. Can't have beers outside in public. You can only have beers on a patio at a restaurant if you also order food. No food- no drinks on a patio! All bars closed at 2. Many bars closed at 1. Heck, even the cafes around my house are closing around 4 pm. Even the bars and clubs you find tend to be kinda try-hard and annoying. That being said, there are good places to chill, just not obvious ones in tourist guides. I'm sure when you visited your friend guided you better than the books!
But yeah, nightlife is not a strong point. Boston would be a better destination for people who want to come and go to a lecture or two, check out some classical art/music, stroll through some classy neighborhoods with a coffee, read at the Public Garden on a nice summer day, maybe go kayaking on the Charles, go to a Red Sox game, and end up at a chill bar and be in bed by 12:30. Which is kinda how I am to be honest! Just a better lifestyle than vacationstyle. If you gave me a ticket somewhere this weekend, I'd be going to New Orleans or San Francisco or something.
I honestly think that Boston isn't a fantastic visitors city. Trying to get around downtown on tiny sidewalks isn't a lot of fun when you don't know where you're going. A lot of stuff people do here when they visit, I just really don't get (Faneuil Hall, for example) or can be done elsewhere (duck boats). You can walk around some stuff you vaguely remember from 3rd grade, maybe be underwhelmed by Harvard's campus or something. I have appreciated Boston the longer I've been here. Visiting would probably be boring without knowing someone who can show you what's what. I wouldn't really know, I never visited before moving here.
Don't know really about Atlanta. Never been there.
Huh? Boston is one of the most historic and prestigious major cities in the U.S., maybe in all of the Americas. The region also has outstanding natural scenery, architecture and food scene.
There few cities so far removed from average generic Americana as Boston. Just being in that type of atmosphere would make for an interesting visit for those not familiar with New England.
That's true, if you come to Boston to blow off some steam and have fun, you'll be sorely disappointed. Discounted alcohol drinks (happy hour) are illegal. Can't have beers outside in public. You can only have beers on a patio at a restaurant if you also order food. No food- no drinks on a patio! All bars closed at 2. Many bars closed at 1. Heck, even the cafes around my house are closing around 4 pm. Even the bars and clubs you find tend to be kinda try-hard and annoying. That being said, there are good places to chill, just not obvious ones in tourist guides. I'm sure when you visited your friend guided you better than the books!
But yeah, nightlife is not a strong point. Boston would be a better destination for people who want to come and go to a lecture or two, check out some classical art/music, stroll through some classy neighborhoods with a coffee, read at the Public Garden on a nice summer day, maybe go kayaking on the Charles, go to a Red Sox game, and end up at a chill bar and be in bed by 12:30. Which is kinda how I am to be honest! Just a better lifestyle than vacationstyle. If you gave me a ticket somewhere this weekend, I'd be going to New Orleans or San Francisco or something.
Yeah I can totally see that; Boston is kind of like a "classy" getaway. You go to Providence for the nightlife from what I was told.
Huh? Boston is one of the most historic and prestigious major cities in the U.S., maybe in all of the Americas. The region also has outstanding natural scenery, architecture and food scene.
There few cities so far removed from average generic Americana as Boston. Just being in that type of atmosphere would make for an interesting visit for those not familiar with New England.
To be honest, the history in Boston is kinda overrated, if you're talking national history. Boston tea party? Didn't really accomplish anything. Boston Massacre? Colonists got shot after picking a fight with people with guns. All it did was spark propaganda. First shots of the revolution were in Lexington, not Boston. Paul Revere? Hyped up from a poem written during the civil war (also for propaganda purposes). Local history is indeed intriguing, but I don't think people appreciate it if they don't live here.
But regardless, yes of course there is history, scenery, architecture. I'm going to disagree with the food scene. It's not that good here. I'd take a lot of cities food scenes over Boston's. Yes, there is fresh sea food. So if you want to eat lobster and clams all day every day, it's good.
I live here, I do enjoy it. Just saying it's not a great place to visit on a time limit. Boston is a place to steep in.
Urban Feel: Boston by far
Economy: Pretty equal
Downtown: Boston
Suburbs: Boston
Future possibilities: Boston (Inland Sunbelt Cities are going to have water trouble as the climate keeps warming)
Public transportation: Boston
Open mindness: Boston
Schools: Boston
Wages: Atlanta (Boston's are higher but has a much higher Cost of Living)
Weather: Atlanta
My vote would definitely have gone to Boston here.
To be honest, the history in Boston is kinda overrated, if you're talking national history. Boston tea party? Didn't really accomplish anything. Boston Massacre? Colonists got shot after picking a fight with people with guns. All it did was spark propaganda. First shots of the revolution were in Lexington, not Boston. Paul Revere? Hyped up from a poem written during the civil war (also for propaganda purposes). Local history is indeed intriguing, but I don't think people appreciate it if they don't live here.
But regardless, yes of course there is history, scenery, architecture. I'm going to disagree with the food scene. It's not that good here. I'd take a lot of cities food scenes over Boston's. Yes, there is fresh sea food. So if you want to eat lobster and clams all day every day, it's good.
I live here, I do enjoy it. Just saying it's not a great place to visit on a time limit. Boston is a place to steep in.
The Boston Tea Party and resulting intolerable acts passed by the British was the reason for the Continental Congress in 1774. Along with the Committee of Correspondence (founded by mostly Massachusetts people)were the first steps towards serious unification among the colonies
Also the Battle of Lexington and Concord outside of Boston because the colonials needed to stockpile weapons outside of Boston because the British Occupied the City after the Massacre and the Tea Party.
Also the ending of the occupation of Boston, known as Evacuation Day (March 17th) was the first major defeat of British Forces in the Revolution. It created the first British-Free Colony.
If you don't think Boston has history then nowhere in the United States has any important history.
Urban Feel: Both
Economy: Atlanta
Downtown: Boston
Suburbs: Atlanta
Future possibilities: Atlanta
Public transportation: Both
Open mindness: VERY subjective term. Most from the Right AND Left have no idea what true "open mindedness" really is.
Schools: Boston
Wages: Wages factoring in living costs: Atlanta. Money goes a lot farther.
Weather: Atlanta
If we're talking about CITY instead of METRO (ATL would be farther ahead if considering metro), I'd give a slight edge to Atlanta because of cost of living and weather. My in-laws live in the Boston area and I love it there. But it's just too darn expensive and can't see living somewhere where I'm being taxed into oblivion.
In terms of economy and wages, I'd give the edge to the Boston MSA on both of those aspects. Both areas should be tied at the very least.
The unemployment rate, poverty rate and percentage of people without health insurance is higher in the Atlanta metro while the median household and family income is significantly higher in the Boston metro area. The cost of living difference favors Atlanta, but like I said, that might just put them equal, especially when considering the income differences. GDP and per capita GDP is also higher in the Boston metro.
Urban Feel: Boston by far
Economy: Pretty equal
Downtown: Boston
Suburbs: Boston
Future possibilities: Boston (Inland Sunbelt Cities are going to have water trouble as the climate keeps warming)
Public transportation: Boston
Open mindness: Boston
Schools: Boston
Wages: Atlanta (Boston's are higher but has a much higher Cost of Living)
Weather: Atlanta
My vote would definitely have gone to Boston here.
Atlanta's not running out of water. We get more rainfall than Seattle. We also have more undeveloped land and Boston is pretty much built to capacity.
I know these polls are highly subjective, but to the bolded: really?
I've spent enough time in both cities to feel pretty comfortable saying that Atlanta isn't even as close to as "urban" Boston. Atlanta feels like a big city. There are pockets that have density (Atlanta has some narrow, dense, urban streets downtown), but it's not sustained urbanity on even close to the same level as Boston. Outside of Downtown/Midtown, Atlanta has nothing that is on the same level as the South End, North End, Beacon Hill, Cambridge, Somerville, South Boston, Fenway etc. Boston's a far more dense, compact, and urban city. Especially at the core and in surrounding neighborhoods. Atlanta has better urban bones than it's given credit for, but it's not even close to Boston from an urban standpoint.
I think the gap in public transit is even larger than the gap in urbanity. Boston's one of a handful of cities in the U.S. (along with New York, Chicago, DC, San Francisco, Washington and Philadelphia) where it's almost easier to live without a car than with one. Of course, some of that has to do with urbanity (specifically, walkability), but it's really a testament to transit in the cities. For starters, the MBTA in Boston serves 3x as many passengers daily than MARTA in Atlanta (1.3 Million to 433,000). The MBTA has 4 rapid transit lines (3 heavy rail, 1 light), an extensive bus and bus rapid transit network, commuter rail, and ferries that serve the greater metro area (and beyond). Boston also has multiple Amtrak options (including Acela Express). As a daily commuter or a visitor, Boston is far and away the easier of the two to navigate on public transportation.
Yeah, I'll give you Boston is more urban, now that I think of it. The feel is better. But I found them to be equal in public transit, being in both cities many times over the years. I can only go by my own experiences. The number of passengers isn't as important to me as being able to get where I need to go efficiently, and I found that in both cities. Sometimes the stats and over-analyzing can cloud the simplicity of it all. But in my case, both were equally good.
That's true, if you come to Boston to blow off some steam and have fun, you'll be sorely disappointed. Discounted alcohol drinks (happy hour) are illegal. Can't have beers outside in public. You can only have beers on a patio at a restaurant if you also order food. No food- no drinks on a patio! All bars closed at 2. Many bars closed at 1. Heck, even the cafes around my house are closing around 4 pm. Even the bars and clubs you find tend to be kinda try-hard and annoying. That being said, there are good places to chill, just not obvious ones in tourist guides. I'm sure when you visited your friend guided you better than the books!
But yeah, nightlife is not a strong point. Boston would be a better destination for people who want to come and go to a lecture or two, check out some classical art/music, stroll through some classy neighborhoods with a coffee, read at the Public Garden on a nice summer day, maybe go kayaking on the Charles, go to a Red Sox game, and end up at a chill bar and be in bed by 12:30. Which is kinda how I am to be honest! Just a better lifestyle than vacationstyle. If you gave me a ticket somewhere this weekend, I'd be going to New Orleans or San Francisco or something.
A little while ago, I asked on the Boston forum why Boston nightlife was considered mediocre, because I didn't really get it -- it seems like the city has lots of bars and people who love to go out. The answer I got was basically first, the bars close at 2, and second, there aren't that many dance clubs of the Night at the Roxbury ilk. (Somebody also mentioned that public transit shuts down early, but that's true of every U.S. city that isn't named New York.) So it really depends on how hard you party. Personally, I've probably been at a bar after 2 a.m. like five times in my entire life, and I've never liked clubs, so I can't relate to the Boston nightlife criticism. I'm guessing I'm not alone in that.
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.
