New York vs. San Francisco vs. Chicago vs. Boston (living, best, cost)

[OzmaIX]

Hello, I am currently a sophomore in college and have been seriously thinking about where I'll end up after graduation. I've come down to the listed four cities. New York is the biggest of course, offering the most things to do and people to meet. San Francisco is probably the best option career-wise (computer science), and best weather out of the list. Chicago is certainly much cheaper than the rest and only behind NYC in terms of size. Boston is a nice little contender with a somewhat reasonable cost of living and being in the Northeast close to a bunch of other cities as well. But which of the cities would be the best to live in for a software engineer, who doesn't plan on having kids ever? I want urban living and would take a condo over a house anyday.

[jaygrant]

Hi Im graduating soon and I think you should go with Chicago.
Thats were Im considering going. Its a really nice city because
Its not very intimidating as well as reasonably priced.

[MichiVegas]

For computer science, go with Bay Area or NYC. Those two have the most tech jobs in the U.S.

[TheCityTheBridge]

Career-wise you have a lot of options. There is no question that SF (and the greater Bay Area) is the nation's tech hub, and it is definitely boom time right now. But you have years before you will start your career, and the industry changes rapidly. You haven't really explained what you are looking for in a place, aside from urban living.

The truth is that all four of your options are quite urban, but each is quite different. Perhaps this would be a more useful exercise if you explained what you like and dislike about the places you have lived, what activities interest you, your hobbies, and other things about yourself that might resonate more or less strongly with the cities you have listed. More detail about your specific career interests would also be helpful. If you are interested in biotechnology, mobile technology, or financial market-related technology, that would certainly impact which city is best for your career.

Speaking generally, for SF:

Pros:

-Great food--restaurants, grocery stores, food trucks, and farmer's markets are all excellent
-Great bars--mostly casual, wide range of styles
-Access to outdoor activities year round (hiking, mountain biking, surfing, rock climbing, etc.)
-Access to CA wine country (Napa & Sonoma less than an hour away, Mendocino and Lake less than 3 hours, Central Coast ~3 hours south)
-Focus on small local businesses--SF has ordinances limiting "formula" retail, so you have fewer chain stores (which is a blessing and a curse)
-Diverse city and region--SF has a lower black population than the other cities on your list, but has a larger Asian population; aside from Marin County, the Bay Area is quite racially & ethnically diverse
-Natural beauty--the Bay, the hills, the ocean, Mt. Tam & Mt. Diablo & San Bruno Mountain, it is captivating
-Distinct and interesting neighborhoods--SF is a city of neighborhoods that feel like their own distinct urban villages, with their own types of resident, shops, restaurants, bars, and architecture
-Good transit within city limits--Muni is great and awful, but the city is small enough that it just doesn't take very long to get around; most trips are walkable or bikeable
-Persistent eccentricity

Cons:
-Housing is very expensive
-Regional commuting is challenging, at best
-Urban living can be stressful, especially when you rely on Muni for transit (though access to myriad hiking trails and wine country helps)
-Significant swathes of the City are pretty dirty

[marothisu]

As someone in the computer science field, all four cities and areas provide a number of jobs with it. The Bay Area's is obviously the top, then NYC and Boston, but there's a lot of opportunity in Chicago even though it's last out of the four. More of that opportunity is along the lines of consulting. There is also a growing startup community in Chicago and at one point had a new startup forming every 24-48 hours. Companies raised over $1 billion in VC last year in Chicago, but it's still no SF or anything.

In the end, I think it depends on which areas you get an offer in and everything. Even though Chicago is last on the list for percentage of software jobs, it's still fine. I get contacted all the time on LinkedIn about new jobs and the software engineers I know who have been let go from their jobs have usually found new jobs before their last days. Personally, if you got good grades in college, were involved in other activities, etc and you got a good job in any of those cities, it wouldn't hurt at all.


Regarding COL, Boston isn't actually that much cheaper than NYC or SF.

[grapico]

^^ I agree with most of what you say about SF, but to me the weak point for SF is without a doubt it's transportation compared to the other cities on this list. I'd put it almost laughably below NYC and Chicago, and definitely below Boston as well. I guess you kind of say that as well, but was somewhat vague. While I've lived there and would have no problem living there again, I personally wouldn't live there without a car, but other people obviously do. Both because the transportation isn't great, but the biggest benefit of SF I think is it's location in California and everything around it... I would do NYC/Chicago/Boston without a car no problem.

^ Spot on informed post.

If I had to pick, these might be my 4 favorite cities in the U.S. ... so not a bad list...


NYC by far the largest, cold winter, best transit, most expensive, by far most to do, OK nature, close to Boston, Philly, DC, east coast center of the world vibe.
Boston the smallest on the list, colder winters, 3rd best transit, still pretty expensive, a little better nature, most historic, close to NYC/Montreal, new england vibe.
Chicago, 2nd biggest on the list, coldest winter of the bunch, 2nd best transit, easily the cheapest, nature farther away, most down to earth, 2nd or 3rd most to do, not close to other major destination cities, but centrally located nationally, giant Midwestern city vibe.
SF, 3rd biggest, easily best weather, easily best nature, worst transit on the list, 2nd most expensive, close to Los Angeles, quirkiest of the bunch, west coast vibe.

[marothisu]

I mainly agree with the above, though I would say that Chicago definitely has the most things to do after NYC on the list. I don't think SF or Boston touch it on that front really. It's easy to fall into the same stuff everyday in any city, but once you actually find a source for what's out there, you'll realize just how much crap is always going on that you had no idea about.

[grapico]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I mainly agree with the above, though I would say that Chicago definitely has the most things to do after NYC on the list. I don't think SF or Boston touch it on that front really. It's easy to fall into the same stuff everyday in any city, but once you actually find a source for what's out there, you'll realize just how much crap is always going on that you had no idea about.

For the city no doubt. But some SF posters will include things like the redwoods or a big hill as a thing to do.
I think you can get over the winters, the QOL and money in your pocket, combined with it being already cheaper will allow you to do more city stuff in Chicago...at least for people that aren't banking 100k+. If you are like the large majority of professionals and make around 40-90k, Chicago will get you farther with more money along with great residential stock and more space for your dollar.

Optimal for me would be something like spending 3 months a year in each of these cities.

SF in the winter, NY in the spring, Chicago in the summer, Boston in the Fall.

[tspoon91]

SF of course because its the best OVERALL

[bostonkid123]

Originally Posted by tspoon91

SF of course because its the best OVERALL

Boston of course because it's the BEST OVERALL of OVERALL.