Dallas or Houston??? (San Antonio, Austin, El Paso: sales, affordable apartments, for rent)

[Metro Matt]

Originally Posted by LAnative10

Out of curiosity why did you bold the Asia data? Thats the one where there is the least descrepancy between the two.

I highlighted it because 35,000 people is still equivalent to a small town. Most of them in Houston are of Vietnamese or Chinese descent. I wonder if Indians were included as "Asians" in those numbers, or if there are separate figures for Middle Easterner's, Pakistani's, etc. of which Houston also leads in population. The Nigerian population in Houston is supposed to be the largest in the US.

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

Originally Posted by Metro Matt

I highlighted it because 35,000 people is still equivalent to a small town. Most of them in Houston are of Vietnamese or Chinese descent. I wonder if Indians were included as "Asians" in those numbers, or if there are separate figures for Middle Easterner's, Pakistani's, etc. of which Houston also leads in population. The Nigerian population in Houston is supposed to be the largest in the US.

Just to clarify those arent population figures. Those are (what we in the airline industry call) O&D figures (short for Orgin and Destination figures). Those are the amount of passengers traveling to and from DFW and Houston per year. If you want to know how many passengers travel to and from those cities each day, just divide it by 365. Once you get that figure, divide it by two if you are interested in a per direction figure.

The figures include India and the Middle East. Houston has more O&D to China (minus Hong Kong, Guangzhou, and Shanghai, this is where most of the difference comes in between the numbers. Houston has alot more traffic to smaller cities in China), Southeast Asia (but by a very small margin), Pakistan, and the Middle East. DFW has more O&D to India, Japan, and Korea (by a wide margin).

The Latin American figures are very significant. Houston is number 4 in the country for Latin American O&D and DFW is tied with Chicago for the number 5 spot.

[PNW Transplant]

I have a friend/coworker who moved from Houston to Frederick earlier this year...I'll send him the link so he can provide some insight.

[KerrTown]

Originally Posted by Metro Matt

The Nigerian population in Houston is supposed to be the largest in the US.

Largest outside of London. (Queue "Britannia" and a view of Big Ben)

Originally Posted by LAnative10

The figures include India and the Middle East. Houston has more O&D to China (minus Hong Kong, Guangzhou, and Shanghai, this is where most of the difference comes in between the numbers. Houston has alot more traffic to smaller cities in China), Southeast Asia (but by a very small margin), Pakistan, and the Middle East. DFW has more O&D to India, Japan, and Korea (by a wide margin).

Of course you can't fly around the world from DFW or IAH without connecting through SFO or LAX. I can't fly Philippine Airlines without flying to LAS, LAX, or SFO. My computer professor flies home to Mumbai every year and has to stop in California before going home.

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

Originally Posted by KerrTown

Of course you can't fly around the world from DFW or IAH without connecting through SFO or LAX. I can't fly Philippine Airlines without flying to LAS, LAX, or SFO. My computer professor flies home to Mumbai every year and has to stop in California before going home.

Sure you can. If you live in Houston and are flying to Asia, connect in Tokyo with Continental or Singapore (via Moscow) on Singapore airlines. For me in Dallas and traveling to Asian, I can connect in Seoul on Korean Airlines or Tokyo on American. The flights from Houston to Tokyo and from Dallas to Tokyo and Seoul are nonstop flights. Going to Europe from Dallas, I can connect in London, Amsterdam, Paris, Frankfurt, or Madrid. Houston has the same options minus Madrid and they also have Moscow. Both DFW and Houston have nonstops to just about every major city in Central and South America.

So as you can see, its is extremely easy to avoid, LAX, JFK, SFO, IAD, ORD or an of the other traditional East and West Coast Gateways from DFW or IAH if you want to.

[dv1033]

I think the two cities are pretty different and give you different experiences, this coming from a native Texan and Houstonian. Both are sunbelt cities and sprawl so you won't find heavily populated areas, which may make them appear similar.

I go to Dallas often for friends and feel I have some experience there. Houston has always felt like a bigger city, which I believe is due to the fact of its inner core. DFW is metro full of cities and you just don't have the feel as Houston, as Houston is the center of attention in my opinion. Dallas is definitely nicer of the cities, as Houston has a gritty feel to it. Both cities are pretty diverse statistically wise, but Houston is a more integrated city so the diversity feels greater.

Houston has the greater performing arts and museums, and is surprisingly ranked very well in those categories. Dallas has recently expanded its art district but will certainly take several years to mature. Both cities have equally good nightlife and food, although I like Houston's selection better in food (it's hard to beat Houston in seafood).

Weather wise, Dallas it probably better in the summer for the lack of humidity but it is much hotter (heat wise) in Dallas. Winter wise, it very rarely ices over or snows in Houston. Geographically wise, Houston wins because of its proximity to the beach (not just Galveston) and proximity to other state attractions/locations. Natural beauty wise, Houston wins in my opinion as well. Both cities are forested, but Houston has a greater coverage of trees. Also, Houston's subtropical climate makes it greatly more lush and green looking, the variety of plants and flowers that grow here is great which makes the city more vibrant in an environmental way.

Both cities have their pros and cons, and excel in certain areas.

[SouthmoreAve]

Originally Posted by Dallas native

According to the U.S. Office of Management & Budget, there's very little difference in the population density between the cities of Dallas and Houston. The city of Dallas is estimated to have 3697 people per/sq.mile. The city of Houston is estimated to have 3828 people per/sq.mile. When comparing entire metropolitan statistical areas, the DFW/Arlington MSA is estimated to have 634 people per/sq.mile and the Houston/Sugarland/Baytown MSA is estimated at 630 people per/sq.mile. These sources also indicate that the Houston/Sugarland/Baytown MSA is even more spread out than the DFW/Arlington MSA as the former contains about 8% more area than the latter. The city of Houston is definitely more spread out (about 602 sq.miles) than the city of Dallas (about 385 sq.miles). Neither is compact. I've lived in both places and they both feel about the same to me as far as population density is concerned.

Dallas–Fort Worth Metroplex - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Greater Houston - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I dont want to continue the argument but youre statement that Greater Houston is more spread out than the Metroplex due to Houston's Larger MSA is false. Greater Houston is actually 8,929 of LAND AREA, the rest is water. DFW is 8,991 of LAND AREA, the rest is water. So, technically Greater Houston isnt more spread out. Not a major difference, just clarifying the data. And i dont want to create an argument.

And even the city density numbers arent just. Houstons density that you posted was for 2007, while Dallas' was for 2008. So Houston, which grew, widened the margin even more. Now wether both cities feel the same or not in terms of population density is up to you, but facts prove that Houston is more dense even though it covers a lot more area. 1 year shouldnt make a noticeable difference but it would've made a difference either way.

And this is from the same link you posted.

[Dallas native]

Originally Posted by SouthmoreAve

I dont want to continue the argument but youre statement that Greater Houston is more spread out than the Metroplex due to Houston's Larger MSA is false. Greater Houston is actually 8,929 of LAND AREA, the rest is water. DFW is 8,991 of LAND AREA, the rest is water. So, technically Greater Houston isnt more spread out. Not a major difference, just clarifying the data. And i dont want to create an argument.

It's not an argument as much as a difference of interpretation. If you re-read my comments, I said that the Houston MSA contains about 8% more AREA than the DFW MSA. The fact that a portion of an MSA is water does not reduce the total area of the MSA just as the size of the hole in a donut does not affect the circumference of that donut. The Houston MSA still encompasses an overall area of 10,062 sq.mi. and the DFW MSA still contains an overall area of 9286 sq.mi. regardless of how much water area either contains. Of course people don't live on water, but they can still live at the farthest reaches of the MSA. That's what makes the Houston MSA more spread out than the DFW MSA. Water merely affects the density of the remaining land area. You're right that it's not a major difference.

[gwillyfromphilly]

I have visited both cities I can clearly say that Houston wins. As a Philly guy Houston was the closest in comparison in terms of a big city feel for me. So I have to go with H-town over Dallas!

[Lakewooder]

Dallas has class, Houston has brass..I've lived in both but I clearly favor Dallas. Dallas does have some snobs but most of those are along the Preston Road spine from Highland Park to the northern suburbs. The rest of town is friendly and laid back, except for some of the folks in Uptown (who probably came from the Preston Road "Golden Corridor").