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.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,568,606 times
Reputation: 5786
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucky Clover
Biotech aside, Boston's tech scene is pretty underrated. Seattle is somewhere I can definitely understand because it actually mirrors Boston in a lot of ways when you take AWS and Microsoft away. I do think though that the proximity from the Bay helps Seattle more than any other city in this regard as well for a company to move and further add jobs and talent in Seattle.
I've lived in Chicago, there's really no way Boston isn't several tiers above Chicago. I work in the industry and know what the market there was like. It's definitely up and coming like a lot of cities are. I'm not as familiar with Philly so I won't speak on that. Denver is also one of those similar type of cities like the Research Triangle and Austin where it has made a mark but Boston's tech scene spans several decades.
Before Silicon Valley was Silicon Valley there was the 128 corridor and the companies back then competed with each other. Austin is much more start up friendly due to the costs and the presence of startups there but you have some of the best and most robust tech companies come out of the Boston area.
Boston and NYC both belong on the same level as Seattle and of course significant levels below SV/SF. I think DC metro is where it gets a little murky and I'm not as familiar with the area other than NoVA and the presence it has with AWS and Google. but I've always read how great the workforce is there. Women especially seem to thrive in Tech in the DC Metro area, I think they have some of the highest ratio's of women in Tech in the entire country.
Yes for women in tech DC typically ranks as the #1 metro area in the country. Baltimore ranks #2.
I agree Boston is above Chicago as a tech hub (historically speaking), but "several tiers above"? That sounds like great hyperbole to me. Chicago is a very, very underrated tech city, that has quietly been booming the past few years, and has great future prospects for growth. Just look at what's happening in the West Loop and the old post office redevelopment; this is Chicago's new "tech hub", where just 10 years ago, this area was a meatpacking district. Now home to McDonald's HQ, Google offices, and plenty more, with more opening up every years. Chicago could even look better than Boston for future startups, as rent is cheaper than pretty much any coastal city (except maybe Philly) at this point, and urbanization continues to boom.
Again, I agree bio-tech gives Boston a boost here, but some of you are definitely overrating it as "the second Silicon Valley". Yes, I'm going off of a combination of stats as well as personal perception, but it is nowhere near the level of a tech-centric city as the west coast.
Neither NYC or Boston are on the same level as Seattle here.
I definitely understand Chicago's tech scene has come a long way in the last 10-15 years. The West Loop area is transformed from when Motorola had first decided to come towards that side of town. GrubHub has been introduced, etc. I'm not saying it can't grow and get to a level but it's not there yet. What I'm saying though is that Tech has been part of Boston's identity for decades, it is a few notches above a place that is just up and coming. Chicago has a lot going for it though, no doubt.
I don't think there is really a 2nd Silicon Valley though, it's absurd to think there really is another when you actually break it all down. Boston has just as much right to be on the same tier as Seattle and NYC. Perception is a funny thing, it's different from reality sometimes. Like I said, the tech scene in some places may be more pronounced in terms of more known bigger entities, but in terms of actual facts and the numbers, you seem to think Seattle is on a mountaintop compared to a place like Boston in the tech world. That's simply not the case. BioTech isn't even on the horizon for these posts, I mentioned it in my previous post. I'm not sure that I'd look at BioTech when discussing this subject -- SF Bay Area has a great BioTech scene and that's the last thing that would come to mind when discussing SaaS, AaaS, and other Tech companies and startups.
You're not going to convince me that Seattle is that much higher when from what I've seen, numbers and all, it simply doesn't back that statement up. I can at least rationally agree how you can put it as the #2 tech hub though.
That may be so, but I worked in IT (Texas Instruments) for 33 years and did not know anyone who came from Biotech to work for us or left my company to work in biotech.
Don’t forget about fintech.
huh, so pelé doesnt count as a real athlete since he didnt play baseball ?
Location: Miami (prev. NY, Atlanta, SF, OC and San Diego)
7,409 posts, read 6,553,115 times
Reputation: 6685
Didn’t say that though IT is (or was, pre-Covid) expected to be a $5.2 trillion worldwide industry this year vs Biotech worldwide expectation of being a $727 billion industry by 2025 (couldn’t find this year’s projection for worldwide)...
Within the US, IT industry is $1.7 trillion (2020) v US biotech $113 billion (2020)—even bigger difference. Size matters.
Please correct if these numbers I pulled are wrong.
Location: Miami (prev. NY, Atlanta, SF, OC and San Diego)
7,409 posts, read 6,553,115 times
Reputation: 6685
I wouldn’t, just as I don’t equate biotech with IT (or a consumer packaged goods rep with a medical devices rep, even though they are both in sales; retail broker v investment banker, etc etc)...I was under the impression you were equating the two. I’m not looking down on biotech, just pointing out the difference including size of industries.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanley-88888888
^ o.k. but i was confused by your t.i. statement. why would you expect an i.t. corporation to hire a bio-engineer or a comedian ?
Last edited by elchevere; 05-28-2020 at 08:01 AM..
I wouldn’t, just as I don’t equate biotech with IT (or a consumer packaged goods rep with a medical devices rep, even though they are both in sales; retail broker v investment banker, etc etc)...I was under the impression you were equating the two. I’m not looking down on biotech, just pointing out the difference including size of industries.
I think the point here is that Boston is likely the 1st or 2nd biotech hub, and is likely the 2nd/3rd/4th IT/software/hardware hub.
Again, I understand the two giants in Seattle and the weight they carry. I also understand the culture there. And I understand New York's significance, which in raw output, is massive. But, it'd be tough to argue any of these three above the other two.
Location: Miami (prev. NY, Atlanta, SF, OC and San Diego)
7,409 posts, read 6,553,115 times
Reputation: 6685
I agree. My point would be IF (I don’t know) Seattle, by virtue of participating in the much larger IT sector and if, as a result, much larger revenue and types of day to day technology that touches our lives would that make it a more important hub?...obviously, with what’s going on around the world, biotech is most definitely relevant but it would be interesting to confirm what criteria we are looking at in making a determination. If Seattle were to “vanish” we would still have SF/SJ; if Boston were to “vanish” we would still have SF....for me, this debate has reinforced the significance of the Bay Area (not that it was ever up for debate) more so than who is #2, 3, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwj119
I think the point here is that Boston is likely the 1st or 2nd biotech hub, and is likely the 2nd/3rd/4th IT/software/hardware hub.
Again, I understand the two giants in Seattle and the weight they carry. I also understand the culture there. And I understand New York's significance, which in raw output, is massive. But, it'd be tough to argue any of these three above the other two.
I agree. My point would be IF (I don’t know) Seattle, by virtue of participating in the much larger IT sector and if, as a result, much larger revenue and types of day to day technology that touches our lives would that make it a more important hub?...obviously, with what’s going on around the world, biotech is most definitely relevant but it would be interesting to confirm what criteria we are looking at in making a determination. If Seattle were to “vanish” we would still have SF/SJ; if Boston were to “vanish” we would still have SF....for me, this debate has reinforced the significance of the Bay Area (not that it was ever up for debate) more so than who is #2, 3, etc.
Haha, you're so right. SF is truly a wagon.
As for the first point you make about Seattle having the much larger IT sector.. That is, again, debatable. Once you get past Microsoft and Amazon (which I understand you cannot overlook), I think Boston probably takes the "head to head" software/hardware match up. As an example, Boston is home to 86 cyber security firms. That's not a typo. And based on the list posted in this thread, Boston (proper) has about 50k more folks working in software/hardware/IT (non-bio) as compared to Seattle (proper).
But, I totally get why Seattle leads the poll. And I understand why Boston is second.
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.
