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 picked Atlanta however if I had $75 million I would never live in a Inland city.
Reason : Terrain...Dallas looks like hilly scrub land and it gets over 100 degrees in the summer.
No thanks.
Neither really but if it were just me, Atlanta by a mile. I like it better and it is so much more beautiful. Not that it takes much to beat the Dallas scenery. Because of my kids though, Dallas. I have a high level hockey player. Atlanta would suck for him. Dallas is not a hotbed but they are fairly decent in that department
I picked Atlanta however if I had $75 million I would never live in a Inland city.
Most people wouldn’t. Costal cities are much more popular than inland ones. That’s the obvious reason why I compared Dallas and Atlanta as opposed to Dallas vs San Diego or Atlanta vs Miami. That would be apples to oranges.
This thread is about as comparable as it gets imo.
Several people have mentioned topography. I disagree with this unless you love pine trees in Georgia. When you're in Atlanta, you see zero mountains besides Stone Mtn. Both are concrete jungles so topography is kinda null here.
But surrounding topography, it depends on how far you go. Texas has hills and lakes around Austin and even a Texas Wine Country in Fredricksburg that Georgia cannot touch.
So there's really give and take.
Climate wise, yes Dallas gets HOT but Atlanta is muggier for longer.
Several people have mentioned topography. I disagree with this unless you love pine trees in Georgia. When you're in Atlanta, you see zero mountains besides Stone Mtn. Both are concrete jungles so topography is kinda null.
As much as I love Dallas, you’re kidding yourself if you think topography is null when comparing the two. Atlanta is far more lush in terms of quantity and variety. It is also absolutely more hilly than anything in the metroplex, not even close.
So yes, Dallas Has Atlanta beat on some things, topography and scenery ain’t one of them, absolutely not.
Several people have mentioned topography. I disagree with this unless you love pine trees in Georgia. When you're in Atlanta, you see zero mountains besides Stone Mtn. Both are concrete jungles so topography is kinda null here.
But surrounding topography, it depends on how far you go. Texas has hills and lakes around Austin and even a Texas Wine Country in Fredricksburg that Georgia cannot touch.
So there's really give and take.
Climate wise, yes Dallas gets HOT but Atlanta is muggier for longer.
Atlanta is noticeably hilly in certain areas, especially in the northern suburbs.
Several people have mentioned topography. I disagree with this unless you love pine trees in Georgia. When you're in Atlanta, you see zero mountains besides Stone Mtn. Both are concrete jungles so topography is kinda null here.
But surrounding topography, it depends on how far you go. Texas has hills and lakes around Austin and even a Texas Wine Country in Fredricksburg that Georgia cannot touch.
So there's really give and take.
Climate wise, yes Dallas gets HOT but Atlanta is muggier for longer.
Austin is 3-3.5 hours from Dallas by car (on a good day). The Hill Country is nice, but, like many things Texans absolutely gush over, I find the region to be more than a little overrated.
Aren't you the same guy who insists that Dallas is a hiker's paradise?
Google Maps terrain image of Dallas and Atlanta from the exact same perspective. Compared to Atlanta, Dallas is pancake flat.
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.