Houston vs. Dallas (Galveston, Conroe, South Houston: snakes, prevent, buy)

[Spade]

Originally Posted by Metro Matt

I think its funny the new Cowboys stadium is closer to Fort Worth than it is Dallas. Even on one of the pre-season games they showed a shot of DT FTW at night with actual people walking the around the streets instead of dead DT Dallas.

It just goes to show other people outside of Texas are catching onto that.

What's your point?

[nakold23]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

They are similar only if you piggy back FW.

Really it takes you guys a combo of two of the top 20 largest cities in the US just to come close to matching us.

You all know you would not be near us without FW.

All your Amenities were brought about because FW was near.

so you are HONESTLY asserting that "all" of our amenities were brought on because of Fort Worth? Do you really believe that we wouldn't have amenities even without the Fort Worth side of the metroplex (we would still have over 4 million people, the same amount as Boston, Phoenix, San Francisco North Bay, and more than the Twin Cities, Seattle, etc)

Honestly that is one of the most asinine comments I have heard yet in quite awhile. Dallas is significantly more globally important than Fort Worth and we could hold are own without them, even if our population was smaller.

The two metros developed differently, so what? No one could possibly ever know how Dallas would of developed without Fort Worth, but with the amount of things going for the area I don't think it would of made as large of an effect as you are making it.

And no, they arent similar "only" with Fort Worth. Maybe regarding metro population, but honestly the two cities themselves are quite similar, except Houston has a little more centralization (even if that means worse traffic ). They are both cosmopolitan, business meccas with similar identities, have beautiful skylines and similar neighborhoods, and no cities in the great state of Texas can truly compete with them.

Honestly some of the posts on here are puzzling to me. Sure, I prefer a Dallas for a variety of reasons, but I always give credit to Houston when it is due, which is quite often. The fact that certain posters here feel this complex, internal desire to assert their city as the best in every possibly way, shape, or form confuses me sometimes confuses me. Dallas beats Houston in many things, and Houston beats Dallas in many things.

Of course I know this is all in good fun, and I love reading this thread when I can. Sometimes things just catch a nerve

[R1070]

It's funny to read the negative context of the posts from people when they refer to Dallas needing FW. In this area we see the fact that the region has two large cities as an advantage. So trying to make it sound negative isn't going to do much. Looking at a map you see city and county lines/divisions. In real life you see miles of growth connecting areas of people who all live in the same metropolitan area and enjoy the opportunities it affords.

[nakold23]

Originally Posted by R1070

It's funny to read the negative context of the posts from people when they refer to Dallas needing FW. In this area we see the fact that the region has two large cities as an advantage. So trying to make it sound negative isn't going to do much. Looking at a map you see city and county lines/divisions. In real life you see miles of growth connecting areas of people who all live in the same metropolitan area and enjoy the opportunities it affords.

agreed. i LOVE fort worth, wouldn't trade it for the world! and not because "we couldn't compete with Houston without it" but because I think it is a genuinely good city. Its got nothing on Dallas of course though

[First24]

Originally Posted by R1070

It's funny to read the negative context of the posts from people when they refer to Dallas needing FW. In this area we see the fact that the region has two large cities as an advantage. So trying to make it sound negative isn't going to do much. Looking at a map you see city and county lines/divisions. In real life you see miles of growth connecting areas of people who all live in the same metropolitan area and enjoy the opportunities it affords.

Great point.

Living in a MSA with two large and distinct core cities, that are separate yet function as one MSA is a great advantage. I appreciate the unique vibes that both Fort Worth and Dallas offer within such a short distance.

[blkgiraffe]

Originally Posted by Scout_972

Great point.

Living in a MSA with two large and distinct core cities, that are separate yet function as one MSA is a great advantage. I appreciate the unique vibes that both Fort Worth and Dallas offer within such a short distance.

The same could be said for Houston. North Houston [Rolling hills and tons of pine trees] and South Houston [Coastal, prairies, swamps, and more] feel and look nothing like Central Houston [Fast paced, vibrant, more urban, cosmopolitan and more].

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by nakold23

so you are HONESTLY asserting that "all" of our amenities were brought on because of Fort Worth?

nope, not because of FW, but because FW was near. Big Difference

Do you really believe that we wouldn't have amenities even without the Fort Worth side of the metroplex

you would, but of a different quality. You would have a smaller... (insert anything here)

(we would still have over 4 million people, the same amount as Boston, Phoenix, San Francisco North Bay, and more than the Twin Cities, Seattle, etc)

I doubt you would have grown to 4M w/o FW. The same amenities garnered by being near FW, are the same ones that drove the population up. W/O FW not only would you not have the amenities you have now, but you would be heall smaller. Like OKC size.

but with the amount of things going for the area I don't think it would of made as large of an effect as you are making it.

the things going on in the area are only because they are drawn by two large cities. All that is going on in the area would not be going on if Dallas didn't have FW near.

And no, they arent similar "only" with Fort Worth. Maybe regarding metro population, but honestly the two cities themselves are quite similar, except Houston has a little more centralization (even if that means worse traffic ). They are both cosmopolitan, business meccas with similar identities, have beautiful skylines and similar neighborhoods, and no cities in the great state of Texas can truly compete with them.

Dallas is only cosmopolitan, and a business mecca, etc because FW is near.

.

Sure, I prefer a Dallas for a variety of reasons, but I always give credit to Houston when it is due, which is quite often.

Of course I know this is all in good fun, and I love reading this thread when I can. Sometimes things just catch a nerve

I give credit to DFW when its due too, but I am just being real, DFW would not be DFW without the FW.
Fact of the matter is you are comparing two huge cities to one.

Dallas was no match for Houston before the census combined it with FW

[HtownLove]

heck, Dallas would probably have failed as a city and become one of the little ghost towns if it didn't have FW helping it survive

[Metro Matt]

Originally Posted by nakold23

so you are HONESTLY asserting that "all" of our amenities were brought on because of Fort Worth? Do you really believe that we wouldn't have amenities even without the Fort Worth side of the metroplex (we would still have over 4 million people, the same amount as Boston, Phoenix, San Francisco North Bay, and more than the Twin Cities, Seattle, etc)

Honestly that is one of the most asinine comments I have heard yet in quite awhile. Dallas is significantly more globally important than Fort Worth and we could hold are own without them, even if our population was smaller.

The two metros developed differently, so what? No one could possibly ever know how Dallas would of developed without Fort Worth, but with the amount of things going for the area I don't think it would of made as large of an effect as you are making it.

And no, they arent similar "only" with Fort Worth. Maybe regarding metro population, but honestly the two cities themselves are quite similar, except Houston has a little more centralization (even if that means worse traffic ). They are both cosmopolitan, business meccas with similar identities, have beautiful skylines and similar neighborhoods, and no cities in the great state of Texas can truly compete with them.

Honestly some of the posts on here are puzzling to me. Sure, I prefer a Dallas for a variety of reasons, but I always give credit to Houston when it is due, which is quite often. The fact that certain posters here feel this complex, internal desire to assert their city as the best in every possibly way, shape, or form confuses me sometimes confuses me. Dallas beats Houston in many things, and Houston beats Dallas in many things.

Of course I know this is all in good fun, and I love reading this thread when I can. Sometimes things just catch a nerve

A little more?

Look how sparse D/FW is compared to Houston!

Houston has almost the same population as D/FW does in a tighter package. Inner city Dallas still has a long way to go before it can compete with Houston's urban inner loop.

[First24]

Heck, the patch of ground where Houston sets now would probably be a flat, boring satelitte city of Galveston if not for the Hurricane of 1900.

Galveston would have been so much more interesting than Houston, if only it'd had a chance to blossom into a major city.