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 am merely stating that comparing with Comcast, Qualcomm is more higher end because its products requires significant R & D, ships all over the world and are more value added. Comcast doesn't even have any technology to steal or be stolen. It is a service company which doesn't provide good service, and is continually ranked among the worst companies of America. This year it even supassed the evil ticketmaster.com which charges you like 20~50 bucks for buying tickets from their website, and took the crown to be the ultimate worst company 2010. http://www.maximumpc.com/article/new..._america_award . What an honor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHG722
Yeah, Qualcomm is so 'high end' that they resort to stealing technology from other companies (coincidentally, in the Philly area)...
Last edited by fashionguy; 05-31-2010 at 08:13 AM..
ExxonMobil is big and rich but it has been there like forever. There is no surprise here. You sit on top of rich oil and you become a big oil company. How original is that. Any nation with such resources have big rich oil companies. The top 20 are filled with them all from different countries. The companies I mentioned such as Facebook and Youtube just started several years ago from NOTHING and are already changing people's lifestyle and they are growing fast just as Google did (Youtube is already bought by google so it became part of google's growth), and they are the American way influencing the whole world. All I am saying is that despite the economic situation in California, startups with great potential still choose to be there and I don't see any startup in Texas or Washington with such potential. You can put together the statistics whatever way you want. The truth is, you don't hear about any relevant startup from those places these years. Facebook expanding to Austin and Seattle makes big news there and they use that to show their economy is so good and attractive. The attraction of them in the high-tech sector is merely when the companies started in California grow bigger, they open a sales office or a product development branch in Austin or Seattle. If you are in high-tech, the real jobs, especially those of promising startups, are in California no matter how high the unemployment rate is there, or how good the other places seem to be.
Many small and medium-size businesses fled California, mainly for Texas and Washington states.And you know what ?
Texas is now number one about Fortune 500 companies, ahead NY and Cali, since 2008.
ExxonMobil, the richest company in the US (far ahead Google or Apple), is in Texas for exemple.
And Texas becomes leader in green energy companies.You must remember Texas is leader in wind power, a very promising sector for jobs and investments.
Last edited by fashionguy; 05-31-2010 at 08:05 AM..
ExxonMobil is big and rich but it has been there like forever. There is no surprise here. You sit on top of rich oil and you become a big oil company. How original is that. Any nation with such resources have big rich oil companies. The top 20 are filled with them all from different countries. The companies I mentioned such as Facebook and Youtube just started several years ago from NOTHING and are already changing people's lifestyle and they are growing fast just as Google did (Youtube is already bought by google so it became part of google's growth), and they are the American way influencing the whole world. All I am saying is that despite the economic situation in California, startups with great potential still choose to be there and I don't see any startup in Texas or Washington with such potential. You can put together the statistics whatever way you want. The truth is, you don't hear about any relevant startup from those places these years. Facebook expanding to Austin and Seattle makes big news there and they use that to show their economy is so good and attractive. The attraction of them in the high-tech sector is merely when the companies started in California grow bigger, they open a sales office or a product development branch in Austin or Seattle. If you are in high-tech, the real jobs, especially those of promising startups, are in California no matter how high the unemployment rate is there, or how good the other places seem to be.
Real jobs ? That doesn't exist ! And virtual jobs neither :lol:
Sorry, but CEOs know that better than you I think.This is their opinion:
- Life style San Diego
- Economy overall Philadelphia
- EducationPhiladelphia
- Metropolitan Area population Philadelphia
- City Area population San Diego
- Professional SportsPhiladelphia
- City Scape (downtown, skyline, notable buildings)Philadelphia
- Public TransportationPhiladelphia
- Major Interstates and other roadsSan Diego
- AirportSan Diego
- Housing San Diego
- Food (Ethnic food, unique food of it's own, etc..) Philadelphia
- Proximity to other locations PUSH
- Economy growth and diversity (Post Recession climate)Philadelphia
- Art galleriesPhiladelphia
- Music scenePhiladelphia
- MuseumsPhiladelphia
- ParksPhiladelphia
- Shopping PUSH
- Climate (which you prefer, and why?) San Diegp
- Notable companies headquartered herePhiladelphia
First instinct is that SD would easily defeat Philadelphia in a poll. And if it were just based on where you would rather live? San Diego wins in the majority of peoples opinion including mine as San Diego is my favorite city in the US..
But you gave some excellent criteria which imo gives the edge to Philadelphia overall as being a more overall advanced society.
Philadlephia along with NYC was one of the 2 main anchors of this country. Although it certainly gets overshadowed by NYC its still remains a key metro moreso than San Diego. Over history Philadlephia was one of the 3 biggest metros in the country up until relatively recently.
Also The cost of housing is so insane in SD that your average family will live a much better lifestyle in the Philadlephia region.
Many small and medium-size businesses fled California, mainly for Texas and Washington states.
That's actually not true at all.
California loses approx 11,000 jobs a year to other states. That is FAR LESS than the jobs created IN California.
And 11,000 out of 18 Million+ is well, not even a blip on the radar screen.
Quote:
Texas is now number one about Fortune 500 companies, ahead NY and Cali, since 2008.
This is due to the run up in TX-based energy companies rising in value-not because any CA F500 moved there.
Quote:
ExxonMobil, the richest company in the US (far ahead Google or Apple), is in Texas for exemple.
Actually Apple has more cash on hand than any company in the world-$41 Billion, surpassing Microsoft and way ahead of ExxonMobil. Actually California dominates the top of the ranking of companies with the most money in the bank.
Furthermore, Chevron the Nation's 2nd biggest and world's 3rd biggest energy company is based in the Bay Area, not Texas. And that goes to show how diversified California's economy is that no industry dominates the state economy.
Quote:
And Texas becomes leader in green energy companies.You must remember Texas is leader in wind power, a very promising sector for jobs and investments.
Not really.
Venture Capital Investment For Clean Tech,
2006-2008
California $6.580 Billion
Massachusetts $1.278 Billion
Texas $717 Million
Washington $635 Million
Colorado $622 Million
Clean Tech Patents, 1999-2008 California 1,401
New York 909
Michigan 749
Texas 414
Connecticut 404
Clean Tech Companies, 2007
California 10,209
Texas 4,802
Florida 3,831
New York 3,323
Ohio 2,513
Clean Tech Jobs, 2007
California 125,390
Texas 55,646
Pennsylvania 38,763
New York 34,363
Florida 31,122
California loses approx 11,000 jobs a year to other states. That is FAR LESS than the jobs created IN California.
And 11,000 out of 18 Million+ is well, not even a blip on the radar screen.
This is due to the run up in TX-based energy companies rising in value-not because any CA F500 moved there.
Actually Apple has more cash on hand than any company in the world-$41 Billion, surpassing Microsoft and way ahead of ExxonMobil. Actually California dominates the top of the ranking of companies with the most money in the bank.
Furthermore, Chevron the Nation's 2nd biggest and world's 3rd biggest energy company is based in the Bay Area, not Texas. And that goes to show how diversified California's economy is that no industry dominates the state economy.
Not really.
Venture Capital Investment For Clean Tech,
2006-2008
California $6.580 Billion
Massachusetts $1.278 Billion
Texas $717 Million
Washington $635 Million
Colorado $622 Million
Clean Tech Patents, 1999-2008 California 1,401
New York 909
Michigan 749
Texas 414
Connecticut 404
Clean Tech Companies, 2007
California 10,209
Texas 4,802
Florida 3,831
New York 3,323
Ohio 2,513
Clean Tech Jobs, 2007
California 125,390
Texas 55,646
Pennsylvania 38,763
New York 34,363
Florida 31,122
California is first, I know that but the rising of Texas in green energy is recent, and your numbers are from 2007.
Texas is the king of wind power, that will create many jobs in the future
We'll have California (solar leader) vs Texas (wind leader) about green jobs.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,034,220 times
Reputation: 4047
- Life style: Toss up, they're different.
- Economy overall: Philadelphia
- Education: Philadelphia
- Metropolitan Area population: Philadelphia
- City Area population: Philadelphia
- Professional Sports: Philadelphia
- City Scape (downtown, skyline, notable buildings): San Diego, IMHO. I really like the downtown atmosphere on the coast and the mountain backdrop.
- Public Transportation: Philadelphia, San Diego's is alright, but not at the extent to Philadelphia's.
- Major Interstates and other roads: San Diego, it's near the border, so the roads play a larger role.
- Airport: San Diego
- Housing: San Diego, the homes on mountains are pretty cool, IMHO but they're different in style hard to compare.
- Food (Ethnic food, unique food of it's own, etc..) Toss Up, they're both large cities, you can expect to find great food in both.
- Proximity to other locations: Toss Up, San Diego has a good international location for those wanting to go to Mexico and such, and it's only a two hour drive from LA. Where as Philadelphia sits in the middle of BosWash and enjoys the rich history of it's peers.
- Economy growth and diversity (Post Recession climate) Don't know.
- Art galleries: Philadelphia
- Music scene: San Diego
- Museums: Philadelphia
- Parks: Toss Up
- Shopping: Toss Up
- Climate (which you prefer, and why?): San Diego, but I prefer the climate to Philadelphia more, I like snow.
- Notable companies headquartered here: See other posters
- Anything else you can possibly think up and want to add:
San Diego- The zoo is really nice, comin conventions during summer are amazing, the topography is great, and lots of activities. The city is beautiful in so many ways.
Philadelphia- History is on Philly's side, it's one of the best established cities in the country and the only one to stay in the top 10 largest cities from the start of the census along with NYC.
After having said that, Philadelphia is good, it's real good. But I like San Diego more, it's one of my top 3 cities along with Seattle and Tucson. I really like the natural scenery for San Diego. That's why I voted for it.
But this is a great comparison nonetheless, because these two cities have such different vibes, and such different climates, pretty much everything that it's worth comparing them.
If you want sunny weather and you like to sit in traffic for hours on end, it's San Diego by a landslide. If you prefer a wealth of culture, events, great restaurants and an easygoing lifestyle, it's Philly.
I am merely stating that comparing with Comcast, Qualcomm is more higher end because its products requires significant R & D, ships all over the world and are more value added. Comcast doesn't even have any technology to steal or be stolen. It is a service company which doesn't provide good service, and is continually ranked among the worst companies of America. This year it even supassed the evil ticketmaster.com which charges you like 20~50 bucks for buying tickets from their website, and took the crown to be the ultimate worst company 2010. Comcast Wins "Worst Company in America" Award | Maximum PC . What an honor.
I dont care what Comcast did, but Qualcomm stole millions of dollars in technology and patents from my dad's company.
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.
