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'd go with Los Angeles. More options for all walks of life, better climate, more museums, more of practically everything. San Francisco's attractions are a bit more self-contained, but tends to be a bit on the pricey side regarding accommodations. Besides, I've been to LA three times, SF just twice. And LA's transit system has improved to the point where you can go car lite (ride sharing or bus) these days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shakeesha
Barnes outranks Baylor according to a few studies. The campus looks denser and more a part of the urban fabric.
Which metro has better high end shopping?
Charlotte, NC or Indianapolis, IN?
I'd probably say Charlotte, despite the fact that Indy has a downtown mall and Charlotte doesn't, since we're comparing metroes. Charlotte has a Neiman-Marcus and Nordstrom, while Indy has Saks and Nordstorm, so its a draw for high-end department stores. If you look at post #37 on this thread, you'll see that Charlotte has 19 high-end retailers, while Indy has just nine:
Charlotte is in the same tier as Portland, Tampa, St. Louis, and Nashville in the luxury shopping department. Indy's tier is Baltimore, Pittsburgh, New Orleans, Sacramento, Kansas City, and OH's big three "C" cities. Also, Charlotte seems to have more new money and better growth, so its future prospects seem brighter to sustain these businesses.
Which city is better for fall foliage, Knoxville or Philadelphia?
^
I'd go with Los Angeles. More options for all walks of life, better climate, more museums, more of practically everything. San Francisco's attractions are a bit more self-contained, but tends to be a bit on the pricey side regarding accommodations. Besides, I've been to LA three times, SF just twice. And LA's transit system has improved to the point where you can go car lite (ride sharing or bus) these days.
I'd probably say Charlotte, despite the fact that Indy has a downtown mall and Charlotte doesn't, since we're comparing metroes. Charlotte has a Neiman-Marcus and Nordstrom, while Indy has Saks and Nordstorm, so its a draw for high-end department stores. If you look at post #37 on this thread, you'll see that Charlotte has 19 high-end retailers, while Indy has just nine:
Charlotte is in the same tier as Portland, Tampa, St. Louis, and Nashville in the luxury shopping department. Indy's tier is Baltimore, Pittsburgh, New Orleans, Sacramento, Kansas City, and OH's big three "C" cities. Also, Charlotte seems to have more new money and better growth, so its future prospects seem brighter to sustain these businesses.
Which city is better for fall foliage, Knoxville or Philadelphia?
The Great Smokies or the Poconos?
Well, actually, the entire Delaware valley and Southeastern Pennsylvania are quite forested and very colorful in the fall, but I'm going to give this one to Knoxville because it's in the mountains rather than the Piedmont.
An aside: Someone who I wished identified themselves so I could reply privately +1'd me on my last comparison, saying that I was trying to "school somebody" with my "trick question" about parks and boulevards in LA vs. KC. I was: LA has more playgrounds than it has parks, while KC combines the two in many of its 220-odd parks — and LA's boulevards are not part of its park system while KC's are. However, LA does have three times the total parkland of KC — but it also has nearly eight times KC's population. Per capita, KC does better by its residents than LA does on the park front.
Which city has the more interesting dining scene, Houston or New Orleans?
Which city is a better place to visit: Burlington, VT or Saratoga Springs, NY?
Because of the thread, I'm taking this as a generic "which would the average person enjoy visiting more", not me specifically. That's definitely Saratoga Springs, the spa resorts there are legendary. I don't know of anything particularly touristy in Vermont unless you're a big Bernie Sanders fan (or Phish, I guess, they formed at U of V).
I was in the running for a job in Saratoga with Goldman Sachs at one point (in their IT department). Weird place for a tech job, I thought...
Which city would be better for an outdoorsy person (hiking, biking, rafting, whatever): Springfield, IL or Lubbock, TX?
^
I'd go with Los Angeles. More options for all walks of life, better climate, more museums, more of practically everything. San Francisco's attractions are a bit more self-contained, but tends to be a bit on the pricey side regarding accommodations. Besides, I've been to LA three times, SF just twice. And LA's transit system has improved to the point where you can go car lite (ride sharing or bus) these days.
I'd probably say Charlotte, despite the fact that Indy has a downtown mall and Charlotte doesn't, since we're comparing metroes. Charlotte has a Neiman-Marcus and Nordstrom, while Indy has Saks and Nordstorm, so its a draw for high-end department stores. If you look at post #37 on this thread, you'll see that Charlotte has 19 high-end retailers, while Indy has just nine:
Charlotte is in the same tier as Portland, Tampa, St. Louis, and Nashville in the luxury shopping department. Indy's tier is Baltimore, Pittsburgh, New Orleans, Sacramento, Kansas City, and OH's big three "C" cities. Also, Charlotte seems to have more new money and better growth, so its future prospects seem brighter to sustain these businesses.
There were a few retailers missing for Nashville in this list. Hope to see it updated soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTimidBlueBars
Because of the thread, I'm taking this as a generic "which would the average person enjoy visiting more", not me specifically. That's definitely Saratoga Springs, the spa resorts there are legendary. I don't know of anything particularly touristy in Vermont unless you're a big Bernie Sanders fan (or Phish, I guess, they formed at U of V).
I was in the running for a job in Saratoga with Goldman Sachs at one point (in their IT department). Weird place for a tech job, I thought...
Which city would be better for an outdoorsy person (hiking, biking, rafting, whatever): Springfield, IL or Lubbock, TX?
Springfield, IL due to Lake Springfield and being closer to more scenic areas. You could enjoy St. Louis's collection of outdoor and water sports.
There were a few retailers missing for Nashville in this list. Hope to see it updated soon.
Springfield, IL due to Lake Springfield and being closer to more scenic areas. You could enjoy St. Louis's collection of outdoor and water sports.
Which city would be better for German cuisine?
Cincinnati, OH or Baltimore, MD?
I'm guessing Cincinnati. I think that part of the country has more people of German heritage. Which city has better beer/breweries Milwaukee or Denver?
I'm guessing Cincinnati. I think that part of the country has more people of German heritage. Which city has better beer/breweries Milwaukee or Denver?
Personally I prefer Denver as I prefer Coors over Miller, but as far as local breweries I think Milwaukee might have an edge.
Which city is better for surfing, Miami or Jacksonville?
Miami, due to the wider array of services (schools/instructions, shops, events) provided, along with its geographical location. Jacksonville is located right on the Horse Latitudes (30N), so the waves are smaller there outside of storms. Miami gets trade wind flows in the summer, so there's a good current that can push waves towards the shore.
Which city would be better for coffee, Amarillo or Allentown?
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.