Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Better urban amenities/infrastructure
Osaka 39 76.47%
Chicago 12 23.53%
Voters: 51. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-19-2019, 08:06 PM
 
Location: NYC
2,546 posts, read 3,274,585 times
Reputation: 1924

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cavsfan137 View Post
I'm guessing... sort of. I have two visits to Chicago in my life, once at 9, once at 16 (one with family, one with school band.. so yes, sadly not much exploring). Never have been to Osaka. What I "know" about it is based upon interactions with my brother in law who has now spent time there two straight years, some informal research, and a personal visit to Tokyo last year (I'm not quite sure how much the two differ, but I am semi-familiar with Tokyo having spent 4 days wandering there, and I would assume there are at least some parallels).

That being said...
Transit: Osaka
Walkability: Citywide, Osaka (the central part of Chicago, the loop might compare, but Osaka perhaps has a much wider swath that is walkable)
Restaurants/Food: Unsure. Osaka I believe has more Michelin stars esp. when considering Kyoto, and probably more unique local cooking styles and freshness. That said, Chicago has more international options due to overall diversity. Hard to say/toss up, I'm sure Osaka is cosmopolitan enough to have at least some international options to, the Japanese consumer demands quality.
Nightlife: Honestly I'm not sure.. I feel like one could have a plenty good time in both
Vibrancy/Street Scene: I would have to imagine that a citywide basis, Osaka is much more vibrant on a pedestrian level. It's also much safer as a whole, which helps with wandering.
Architecture: If this were the Osaka metro as a whole including Kyoto... probably Osaka wins. Being that it's not though, I'll probably give the nod to Chicago, though I must also say that saying I don't know Chicago that well, and also that Osaka's metro is significantly larger even excluding Kyoto which I believe is a separate MSA, and so there are probably more changes to see random/unique/historic/etc. architecture.
Downtown/Central Area: Don't know enough to say for certain. I'll say that they are probably comparable in their impressiveness, but in different ways.
Neighborhoods: I would guess that Chicago's neighborhoods are probably filled with a bit more interesting/unique character/architecture. That said, the QOL overall in and around portions of Osaka is probably much higher. I would assume overall education, safety, infrastructure, health etc. ratings on a citywide basis trend in Osaka's direction as well.
Cultural Attractions: Hmm... I'm gonna say even, with again, the preface that this is coming from an American perspective, and that I'm not including Kyoto in this comparison which would almost certainly give Osaka the win, and that I don't know Osaka as well. I say this because I imagine that Osaka has a larger volume of attractions and a more unique cultural identity, whereas Chicago perhaps has more unique attractions, and a world class scene for visual and performing arts.

That leaves it at roughly 5.5-3.5 win for Osaka, which isn't bad considering the difference in length of history and size and urbanity between the two cities.

The thing I can tell you is that in two separate instances, I really got the feel that Chicago was a village/small town by comparison, in spite of how advanced and world class it is in a number of areas
1) when flying into Chicago to connect vs. flying into Mexico City on a flight, when I was 15. The two times I have flown into Mexico City have perhaps been the most remarkable fly-ins I have experienced.
2) When flying back from Beijing to Chicago O'Hare. The buildings/transit/infrastructure just seemed provincial and light years behind the infrastructure, etc. of the places I had just visited (Beijing/Tokyo/Hong Kong). Not a bad thing, just an informal observation/scale comparison.
This is pretty spot on. For someone who's never been to Osaka this is a very accurate assessment.

Indeed, infrastructurally, Chicago is light years behind Osaka. Provincial is the right word to use. Outdated and delapidated are two others. Japan's train stations and enormous surrounding underground shopping and entertainment complexes are a sight to behold. In Namba and Umeda, Osaka has two of the biggest and best.

I remember taking the train from Kyoto back to Osaka and arriving in the Osaka/Umeda station. It was an exhilarating feeling of stepping into a vibrancy of a word class metropolis -- massive halls that are super modern and squeaky clean, bright lights, huge crowds as far the eye can see, shops everywhere... and it went on and on and on. Truly every urban geek's wet dream. On the list of 50 busiest train stations in the world, Osaka has 5 -- the 3 central ones (Umeda, Namba and Tennoji) are in the top 13. The entire U.S. has zero. People should wrap their minds around that when they compare Osaka and Chicago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-19-2019, 08:28 PM
 
4,087 posts, read 3,200,597 times
Reputation: 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzrovian View Post
This is pretty spot on. For someone who's never been to Osaka this is a very accurate assessment.

Indeed, infrastructurally, Chicago is light years behind Osaka. Provincial is the right word to use. Outdated and delapidated are two others. Japan's train stations and enormous surrounding underground shopping and entertainment complexes are a sight to behold. In Namba and Umeda, Osaka has two of the biggest and best.

I remember taking the train from Kyoto back to Osaka and arriving in the Osaka/Umeda station. It was an exhilarating feeling of stepping into a vibrancy of a word class metropolis -- massive halls that are super modern and squeaky clean, bright lights, huge crowds as far the eye can see, shops everywhere... and it went on and on and on. Truly every urban geek's wet dream. On the list of 50 busiest train stations in the world, Osaka has 5 -- the 3 central ones (Umeda, Namba and Tennoji) are in the top 13. The entire U.S. has zero. People should wrap their minds around that when they compare Osaka and Chicago.
I just coughed up my sip of wine ..... a New Yorker specifically demeaning Chicago's infrastructure....
WOW, really Chicago's:

- streets are cleaner then NYC, Core especially.... Mighty as it is.
- is at least upgraded and upgrading more and more of its L. Computerized since the 90s Nothing extravagant.... just to be able to add more train cars and trains in especially its lines that surpassed their 1920s ridership numbers and get more decades use.
- gated and shuttered store fronts are absent from its Core and vast majority of good neighborhoods .... unlike Manhattans plenty seen.
- its L and simple stations ( but for new ones ) are CLEANER TOO. Then NYC's.
- new L cars as soon as Chicago receives its considerable new order in full. Will have no train more then 10-years old.
- Chicago's stations and now more and more buses are equipped with viewing scenes for the next train, bus. Or it comes right to your phone fore your stop the minute to expect it due. Not bad considering age in the upgrades. All trains were fully with automating announcing too since the 90s.

Yes, I know not about Might NYC. But the irony of mocking Chicago infrastructure by a New Yorker I found ..... I will leave it at strange.

My comment is not to say whatsoever. That Chicago's infrastructure is better then Osaka's. Of course it is not. Just I'd put Chicago's up to NYC's as aspects outside of volume and scope and quantity..... has better infrastructure and cleaner than NYC's.

*** I probably have no business reporting this post from today (from another thread) Complementing Chicago by a visitor today ....
But I'm adding it to my post so all is not terrible and inferior in Chicago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by T. Damon View Post
Wow! What a freaking gorgeous city! Of course the buildings are amazing but the planters, the flowers, the hanging baskets, the trees and the parks all create such a complete and stunning environment. And is this place the Singapore of the states because at least The Loop is spit shined clean. I’ve never seen a city so devoid of trash and litter, it’s crazy! The Chicago city-data user who posted of his impressions of LA after his visit was being kind of his description of DTLA as a bit scruffy.

Just landed yesterday so still so much to see, Architecture Boat tour, Architecture Center and Oak Park tomorrow but just got back to the Hotel in the theater district after already walking eight miles today and hit up both The Art Institute and the Aquarium. The Pokémon freaks in Grant Park are more than a little distracting though lol!

We managed to slide into two of the secret four seats at the bar last night at Au Cheval bypassing the three hour wait by 100 minutes for an awesome burger and met some super fun locals at the Wolf Den (?) next door just diving into it to escape the showers with whom we drank with and became best buddies and they have already invited us to go to some local concerts with them, so, we approve of the Mid-Western friendliness!

On to more fun in your fantastic city!
Sorry for the intrusion if over the top... Carry on.

Last edited by DavePa; 06-19-2019 at 09:03 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2019, 09:32 PM
 
Location: NYC
2,546 posts, read 3,274,585 times
Reputation: 1924
DavePa — are you challenging my assertion that Chicago’s infrastructure is light years behind Osaka? If not, why are you posting all this crap? What does me being from NYC have anything to do with it? Seriously dude, did you forget to take your medication today?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2019, 10:05 PM
 
4,087 posts, read 3,200,597 times
Reputation: 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzrovian View Post
DavePa — are you challenging my assertion that Chicago’s infrastructure is light years behind Osaka? If not, why are you posting all this crap? What does me being from NYC have anything to do with it? Seriously dude, did you forget to take your medication today?
Do you think NYC wins a infrastructure contest? My assertion was on irony. A New Yorker lessening Chicago infrastructure. Not that Chicago's and New York's don't have Japan's cities rival both. Size is irreverent when one asserts quality issues and substandard.

I stand by my post. Had my nightcap of wine and C-D and Good night.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2019, 08:19 AM
 
Location: In the heights
36,893 posts, read 38,801,914 times
Reputation: 20924
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa View Post
Do you think NYC wins a infrastructure contest? My assertion was on irony. A New Yorker lessening Chicago infrastructure. Not that Chicago's and New York's don't have Japan's cities rival both. Size is irreverent when one asserts quality issues and substandard.

I stand by my post. Had my nightcap of wine and C-D and Good night.
I'm in New York City as well and I definitely think Osaka's infrastructure is much ahead of NYC's especially when we are talking about the metropolitan area. The differences in how extensive the two systems are somewhat less than when it comes to a comparison to Chicago, but the state of good repair is worse and outdated and dilapidated very much can be applied to NYC's infrastructure.

Your post doesn't make any sense, because no one was claiming anything about NYC nor is that even a worthwhile point since by that token pretty much anyone from anywhere that's not a handful of European and East Asian cities can comment without you getting into a huff because there are a scant few cities that have infrastructure that can compare to Osaka's. There is not much to argue here--infrastructure in the US has been neglected and poorly planned for quite a while despite the US having quite a large GDP per capita. It is what it is and what it is is bad.

Anyhow, Nagoya is probably the more apples to apples comparison in many ways.

Last edited by OyCrumbler; 06-20-2019 at 08:46 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2019, 08:59 AM
 
Location: NYC
2,546 posts, read 3,274,585 times
Reputation: 1924
Quote:
Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare View Post
It's not about inferior, it's about urbanity. American cities are the least urban in the world even the big ones next to Australian and Canadian cities. Japanese aren't only significantly denser than European cities over larger areas, Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto is just on a whole 'nother level in terms of any measurable urbanity statistics except maybe skyline and food diversity, the latter has little to do with Urbanity.

Like another poster said even NYC would struggle as both NYC and Osaka probably have similar populations over comparable areas and suburban NYC isn't as bad as suburban Chicago in terms of lack of urbanity, it is still miles from Osaka where the suburbs are almost as dense as the core- 20,000 ppsm vs. 30,000 ppsm. While U.S we are talking about 5,000 ppsm vs. 30,000 ppsm in NYC and even lower if you split inner suburbs vs. outer suburbs.

Obviously the Osaka area doesn't have an equivalent to Manhattan, technically no city has an equivalent to Manhattan, which is likely the most impressive amount of urbanity in the first world next to Hong Kong. The third world is likely going to pass up Manhattan just because some cities will have over 50,000,000 people in 30-40+ years, which means an area of 100,000 ppsm over a massive area especially in India or China is very possible.
America is a nation of extremes where all ideas seem to get pushed to the limits of capitalist imagination. So perhaps it is no surprise that the most suburbanized country in the world has also produced the most intensely developed 20 sq miles on Earth.

No city examplifies this phenomenon more than Chicago, the quintessential American city. Here you will see one of the most magnificent skylines in the world featuring some truly awe-inspiring modern architecture, and a stone-throw away tracts of empty fields, surface lots, warehouses and single family townhouses. Go up Sears Tower and you will see downtown skyscrapers quickly give way to endless flatness as far the eye can see, covered by tree canopy so that you can barely see the low-rise development hidden underneath.

Chicago’s spectacular downtown disguises for many tourists a city that is for the most part, by global standards at least, not particularly dense. Osaka doesn’t have an impressive concentrated skyline like Chicago, but pound for pound it is far more dense, urban and vibrant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2019, 09:04 AM
 
4,087 posts, read 3,200,597 times
Reputation: 3048
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler View Post
I'm in New York City as well and I definitely think Osaka's infrastructure is much ahead of NYC's especially when we are talking about the metropolitan area. The differences in how extensive the two systems are somewhat less than when it comes to a comparison to Chicago, but the state of good repair is worse and outdated and dilapidated very much can be applied to NYC's infrastructure.

Your post doesn't make any sense, because no one was claiming anything about NYC nor is that even a worthwhile point since by that token pretty much anyone from anywhere that's not a handful of European and East Asian cities can comment without you getting into a huff because there are a scant few cities that have infrastructure that can compare to Osaka's. There is not much to argue here--infrastructure in the US has been neglected and poorly planned for quite a while despite the US having quite a large GDP per capita. It is what it is and what it is is bad.
I sent by the irony of that post from a New Yorker active in anther thread that Chicago in it go basically forgotten too yesterday. It went on on NYC and left Chicago behind. Though very much in the topic too.

No one denies US infrastructure overall can't go head to head with a major Japanese city. But going for Chicago's jugular is what I saw at the time.

For one I never voted. Never been to Japan sand noted that. But I clearly know the scope of European transit superior also. Noted that. But so far beneath Osaka.... as another said. It's still a good functional system in Chicago. Just sooooo much older.

Gave me a chance to note improvements underway. But I find it with irony to specifically lessen Chicago's infrastructure that way it was done and said. Being from NYC. My initial point that the moment gave me a opportunity to repost a just posted very complementary thread comment on Chicago's beauty and assure from transit in Chicago still a very old system no matter how updated it gets.

Chicago has points to boast for all the other criteria in the OP's initial list. Thread ran on infrastructure as being crushed by Osaka. That I or nobody can deny for transit. But Chicago's especially to stress as if totally outdated and DILAPIDATED. Given it came from a Mew Yorker.

Many times I'm sorry I posted in a thread. I do not feel I regret my post overall here. It at least gave a opportunity to defend Chicago's working transit system and not let it be hanging on totally dilapidated and note its upgrades that bring it computerized aspects to the 21st century.

I know you do not go overboard in post to make your points. Nor any post that can be seen as unfairly over-lessening one of my favorite major cities.

Clearly we can still see a large degree being a mismatch of these two cities that I instantly know who would win with little on Chicago's points that might be positive on many criteria mentioned.

To carry on with replies to it in defense I will probably regret. But let it not derail the thread if there is anything more to say on the many criteria never really discussed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2019, 10:13 AM
 
Location: NYC
2,546 posts, read 3,274,585 times
Reputation: 1924
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler View Post
I'm in New York City as well and I definitely think Osaka's infrastructure is much ahead of NYC's especially when we are talking about the metropolitan area. The differences in how extensive the two systems are somewhat less than when it comes to a comparison to Chicago, but the state of good repair is worse and outdated and dilapidated very much can be applied to NYC's infrastructure.

Your post doesn't make any sense, because no one was claiming anything about NYC nor is that even a worthwhile point since by that token pretty much anyone from anywhere that's not a handful of European and East Asian cities can comment without you getting into a huff because there are a scant few cities that have infrastructure that can compare to Osaka's. There is not much to argue here--infrastructure in the US has been neglected and poorly planned for quite a while despite the US having quite a large GDP per capita. It is what it is and what it is is bad.

Anyhow, Nagoya is probably the more apples to apples comparison in many ways.
Agreed. FWIW, I think Osaka’s PT infrastructure beats the pants off NY as well (which I have alluded to in my prior post). For starters, Kansai’s consolidated rail network registers a staggering 13 million daily passengers — that’s about *double* of NYC subway + commuter rail total and about 13 times Chicago’s L + Metra total. How crazy is that. So the system is obviously more extensive and is designed to handle much bigger crowds. More importantly, in terms of quality, physical condition, frequency and punctuality it is on another planet from NYC’s system. Grand Central is a beautiful station but it is truly small-time compared to Osaka’s mega rail complexes. (I won’t say anything about Penn Station)

In many ways, Osaka punches at the very top tier of global cities for things that we, urban geeks, obsess about — like transit, density, vibrancy etc. if you add Kyoto and Kobe into the mix it might be the most underrated/under the radar megacity in the world. Where Chicago holds its own is in its cultural venues, its world class universities, the quality and diversity of its architecture, as well as its global reach/connectivity. I think Osaka is a much more vibrant and dynamic city, but I can see how someone (depending on their interests) might find Chicago a more appealing and interesting one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2019, 11:35 AM
 
Location: In the heights
36,893 posts, read 38,801,914 times
Reputation: 20924
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa View Post
I sent by the irony of that post from a New Yorker active in anther thread that Chicago in it go basically forgotten too yesterday. It went on on NYC and left Chicago behind. Though very much in the topic too.

No one denies US infrastructure overall can't go head to head with a major Japanese city. But going for Chicago's jugular is what I saw at the time.

For one I never voted. Never been to Japan sand noted that. But I clearly know the scope of European transit superior also. Noted that. But so far beneath Osaka.... as another said. It's still a good functional system in Chicago. Just sooooo much older.

Gave me a chance to note improvements underway. But I find it with irony to specifically lessen Chicago's infrastructure that way it was done and said. Being from NYC. My initial point that the moment gave me a opportunity to repost a just posted very complementary thread comment on Chicago's beauty and assure from transit in Chicago still a very old system no matter how updated it gets.

Chicago has points to boast for all the other criteria in the OP's initial list. Thread ran on infrastructure as being crushed by Osaka. That I or nobody can deny for transit. But Chicago's especially to stress as if totally outdated and DILAPIDATED. Given it came from a Mew Yorker.

Many times I'm sorry I posted in a thread. I do not feel I regret my post overall here. It at least gave a opportunity to defend Chicago's working transit system and not let it be hanging on totally dilapidated and note its upgrades that bring it computerized aspects to the 21st century.

I know you do not go overboard in post to make your points. Nor any post that can be seen as unfairly over-lessening one of my favorite major cities.

Clearly we can still see a large degree being a mismatch of these two cities that I instantly know who would win with little on Chicago's points that might be positive on many criteria mentioned.

To carry on with replies to it in defense I will probably regret. But let it not derail the thread if there is anything more to say on the many criteria never really discussed.
What does it matter if it comes from a New Yorker or anyone else in this comparison? New York City, and Chicago for that matter, may have outdated and dilapidated infrastructure, but at least the two have mass transit infrastructure that's sufficient for many use cases whereas the vast majority of people in the US and also many other parts of the world do not. Regardless of where someone is from, it is a very apparent difference between Chicago's infrastructure and Osaka's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2019, 02:40 AM
 
2,289 posts, read 1,673,975 times
Reputation: 2252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzrovian View Post
Agreed. FWIW, I think Osaka’s PT infrastructure beats the pants off NY as well (which I have alluded to in my prior post). For starters, Kansai’s consolidated rail network registers a staggering 13 million daily passengers — that’s about *double* of NYC subway + commuter rail total and about 13 times Chicago’s L + Metra total. How crazy is that. So the system is obviously more extensive and is designed to handle much bigger crowds. More importantly, in terms of quality, physical condition, frequency and punctuality it is on another planet from NYC’s system. Grand Central is a beautiful station but it is truly small-time compared to Osaka’s mega rail complexes. (I won’t say anything about Penn Station)

In many ways, Osaka punches at the very top tier of global cities for things that we, urban geeks, obsess about — like transit, density, vibrancy etc. if you add Kyoto and Kobe into the mix it might be the most underrated/under the radar megacity in the world. Where Chicago holds its own is in its cultural venues, its world class universities, the quality and diversity of its architecture, as well as its global reach/connectivity. I think Osaka is a much more vibrant and dynamic city, but I can see how someone (depending on their interests) might find Chicago a more appealing and interesting one.
From an international perspective Ōsaka is overshadowed by Tokyo, the largest urban area in the world, and Kyoto, because it’s the cultural capital of Japan.

But you’re right - Osaka is an amazing city in terms of urbanity. I’ve been there twice, both briefly because we were on our way to other destinations. But I was pretty blown away. The super urban feel just doesn’t drop off and everywhere you look you’ve got endless restaurants, nightlife, stores.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top